[council] Draft Agenda for Council meeting Thursday19 August 2004

["Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Agenda for Council meeting Thursday 19 August 2004

12:00 UTC (10pm Melbourne, 1pm London, 8am Washington, 5am Los Angeles)

Item 1: Approval of minutes of
5 August 2004
http://www.gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg00554.html


Item 2: Draft initial report on procedure for use by ICANN in
considering requests for consent and related contractual amendments to
allow changes in the architecture operation of a gTLD registry. 
http://www.icann.org/tlds/gtld-initialreport-registryapproval.pdf 



Item 3: Update on policy implementation from ICANN

3.1 Transfers:
(approved by ICANN Board 25 Apr 2003)
http://www.icann.org/gnso/transfers-tf/report-12feb03.htm

Status: Pending implementation on 12 Nov 2004
http://www.icann.org/transfers/policy-12jul04.htm 



3.2 WHOIS:  
(approved by ICANN Board 27 March 2003)
http://www.icann.org/gnso/whois-tf/report-19feb03.htm 

3.2.1
At least annually, a registrar must present to the Registrant the
current WHOIS information, and remind the registrant that provision of
false WHOIS information can be grounds for cancellation of their domain
name registration. Registrants must review their WHOIS data, and make
any corrections.

Status: Implemented
WHOIS data reminder policy:
http://www.icann.org/registrars/wdrp.htm 
(in effect 31 Oct 2003)


3.2.2

When registrations are deleted on the basis of submission of false
contact data or non-response to registrar inquiries, the redemption
grace period -- once implemented -- should be applied. However, the
redeemed domain name should be placed in registrar hold status until the
registrant has provided updated WHOIS information to the
registrar-of-record.

The Task Force observes that the purpose of this policy is to make sure
that the redemption process cannot be used as a tool to bypass
registrar's contact correction process.

Status: Not yet implemented.


3.2.3

Use of bulk access WHOIS data for marketing should not be permitted. The
Task Force therefore recommends that the obligations contained in the
relevant provisions of the RAA be modified to eliminate the use of bulk
access WHOIS data for marketing purposes. The obligation currently
expressed in section 3.3.6.3 of the RAA could, for instance, be changed
to read as follows):

"Registrar's access agreement shall require the third party to agree not
to use the data to allow, enable, or otherwise support any marketing
activities, regardless of the medium used. Such media include but are
not limited to e-mail, telephone, facsimile, postal mail, SMS, and
wireless alerts."

The bulk-access provision contained in 3.3.6.6 of the RAA would then
become inapplicable.

Status: Not yet implemented


3.2.3

Section 3.3.6.5 of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement currently
describes an optional clause of registrars' bulk access agreements,
which disallows further resale or redistribution of bulk WHOIS data by
data users. The use of this clause shall be made mandatory.

Status: not yet implemented.


3.3 Deletes
(approved by ICANN Board 24 June 2003)
http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20030617.DeletesTF-report.html 


3.3.1 Uniform deletion practice after domain expiry by registrars
      

(a) At the conclusion of the registration period, failure by or on
behalf of the Registered Name Holder to consent that the registration be
renewed within the time specified in a second notice or reminder shall,
in the absence of extenuating circumstances, result in cancellation of
the registration by the end of the auto-renew grace period (although
registrars may choose to cancel the name earlier).  As a mechanism for
enforcing this requirement, registries may elect to delete names for
which an explicit renew command has not been received prior to the
expiration of the grace period.

Extenuating circumstances are defined as:

-               UDRP action
-               valid court order
-               failure of a registrars renewal process (which does not
include failure of a registrant to respond)
-               the domain name is used by a nameserver that provides
DNS service to third parties (additional time may be required to migrate
the records managed by the nameserver)
-               the registrant is subject to bankruptcy proceedings
-               payment dispute (where a registrant claims to have paid
for a renewal, or a discrepancy in the amount paid)
-               billing dispute (where a registrant disputes the amount
on a bill)
-               domain name subject to litigation in a court of
competent jurisdiction
-               other circumstance as approved specifically by ICANN 
 

Where a registrar chooses, under extenuating circumstances, to renew a
domain name without the explicit consent of the registrant, the
registrar must maintain a record of the extenuating circumstances
associated with renewing that specific domain name for inspection by
ICANN consistent with clauses 3.4.2 and 3.4.3 of the registrar
accreditation agreement.

(b)        In the absence of extenuating circumstances (as definited in
Section 3.1.1), a domain name must be deleted within 45 days of either
the registrar or the registrant terminating a registration agreement.

(c)       These requirements retroactively apply to all existing domain
name registrations beginning 180 days after the implementation of the
policy.

(d)       Registrars shall provide notice to each new registrant
describing the details of their deletion and auto-renewal policy
including the expected time at which a non-renewed domain name would be
deleted relative to the domain's expiration date, or a date range not to
exceed ten days in length.

If a registrar makes any material changes to its deletion policy during
the period of the registration agreement, it must make at least the same
effort to inform the registrant of the changes as it would to inform the
registrant of other material changes to the registration agreement (as
defined in clause 3.7.7 of the registrars accreditation agreement)." 

(e)       If a registrar operates a website for domain name registration
or renewal, details of its deletion and auto-renewal policies must be
clearly displayed on the website.

(f)       If a registrar operates a website for domain registration or
renewal, it should state, both at the time of registration and in a
clear place on its website, any fee charged for the recovery of a domain
name during the Redemption Grace Period.

Status: not yet implemented.


3.3.2 Registrar deletion practice after domain name expiry for domain
names subject to a pending UDRP dispute

In the event that a domain which is the subject of a UDRP dispute is
deleted, a complainant in the UDRP dispute will have the option to renew
or restore the name under the same commercial terms as the registrant.
If the complainant renews or restores the name, the name will be placed
in Registrar HOLD and Registrar LOCK status, the WHOIS contact
information for the registrant will be removed, and the WHOIS entry will
indicate that the name is subject to dispute.  If the complaint is
terminated, or the UDRP dispute finds against the complainant, the name
will be deleted within 45 days.   The registrant retains the right under
the existing redemption grace period provisions to recover the name at
any time during the Redemption Grace Period, and retains the right to
renew the name before it is deleted.

Status: Not yet implemented


Item 4: Update on process for new gtlds

The MOU between ICANN and US Dept of Commerce requires:
(from http://www.icann.org/general/amend6-jpamou-17sep03.htm )

Continue the process of implementing new top level domains (TLDs), which
process shall include consideration and evaluation of:

a. The potential impact of new TLDs on the Internet root server system
and Internet stability;

b. The creation and implementation of selection criteria for new and
existing TLD registries, including public explanation of the process,
selection criteria, and the rationale for selection decisions;

c. Potential consumer benefits/costs associated with establishing a
competitive environment for TLD registries; and, 

d. Recommendations from expert advisory panels, bodies, agencies, or
organizations regarding economic, competition, trademark, and
intellectual property issues.

Define and implement a predictable strategy for selecting new TLDs using
straightforward, transparent, and objective procedures that preserve the
stability of the Internet (strategy development to be completed by
September 30, 2004 and implementation to commence by December 31, 2004).



Regards,
Bruce Tonkin