[council] Motion to Address the Remaining Registration Abuse Policies Working Group Recommendations

["Zahid Jamil" <zahid@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Councillors,

 

 

Please find below a motion on RAP I am proposing for the next GNSO Council
call:

 

Motion to Address the Remaining Registration Abuse Policies Working Group
Recommendations

Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies (RAP) Working Group submitted its
report to the GNSO Council on 29 May 2010 (see
<http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf>
http://gnso.icann.org/issues/rap/rap-wg-final-report-29may10-en.pdf);

Whereas the GNSO Council reviewed the report and its recommendations and
decided to form an implementation drafting team to draft a proposed approach
with regard to the recommendations contained in the Registration Abuse
Policies Working Group Final Report;

Whereas the Registration Abuse Policies Implementation Drafting Team
submitted its proposed response to the GNSO Council on 15 November 2010 (see
<http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/rap-idt-to-gnso-council-15nov10-en.pdf
>
http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/rap-idt-to-gnso-council-15nov10-en.pdf)
;

Whereas the GNSO Council considered the proposed approached at its Working
Session at the ICANN meeting in Cartagena;

Whereas the GNSO Council acted on a number of RAP recommendations at its
meeting on 3 February 2011 (see  <http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201102>
http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201102);

Whereas the GNSO Council requested feedback from ICANN Compliance in
relation to WHOIS Access recommendation #2 and Fake Renewal Notices
recommendation #1 and a response was received on 23 February 2011 (
<http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg10766.html>
http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg10766.html). In
addition, a discussion with Compliance Staff was held at the ICANN meeting
in San Francisco.

Whereas the GNSO Council considered the remaining RAP recommendations in
further detail during its working session at the ICANN meeting in Singapore
based on an overview prepared by ICANN Staff (see
<http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/overview-rapwg-recommendations-18may11
-en.pdf>
http://gnso.icann.org/correspondence/overview-rapwg-recommendations-18may11-
en.pdf).

NOW THEREFORE BE IT:

RESOLVED, the GNSO Council thanks the ICANN Compliance Department for its
feedback in relation to WHOIS Access recommendation #2 and determines that
no further work on this recommendation is needed. The GNSO Council welcomes
the commitment of the ICANN Compliance Department ?to report on compliance
activities and publish data about WHOIS accessibility, on at least an annual
basis' (see
(http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg10766.html). 

RESOLVED, the GNSO Council thanks the ICANN Compliance Department for its
feedback in relation to Fake Renewal Notices recommendation #1 and
determines that no further work on this recommendation is needed.   

RESOLVED, the GNSO Council determines that additional information is needed
from the Registrar Stakeholder Group with regard to the conditional Fake
Renewal Notices recommendation #2 before an Issue Report should be requested
of Staff.  The GNSO Council hereby requests that the Registrar Stakeholder
Group provide further information and data on the nature and scope of the
issue of Fake Renewal Notices to help inform the GNSO Council?s and its RAP
WG deliberations on whether an Issue Report should be requested.  A small
group of volunteers consisting of registrar representatives and others
interested (including former RAP WG members) should be formed to prepare
such a request, work with the Registrar Stakeholder Group to obtain the
information requested and report back to the GNSO Council accordingly.

RESOLVED, in response to WHOIS Access recommendation #1, the GNSO Council
requests the WHOIS Survey Drafting Team to consider including the issue of
WHOIS Access as part of the survey it has been tasked to develop. If the
WHOIS Survey Drafting Team is of the view that it is not appropriate or
timely to include WHOIS Access as part of the survey, it should inform the
GNSO Council accordingly so that the GNSO Council can determine what next
steps, if any, might be appropriate at this stage in relation to this
recommendation.

RESOLVED, with regard to the recommendation on Meta Issue: Collection and
Dissemination of Best Practices, the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of
this recommendation and determines to defer its consideration until it
evaluates the outcome of Malicious Use of Domain Names recommendation #1,
which aims to develop best practices to help registrars and registries
address the illicit use of domain names. In light of the pending request to
Staff to develop a Discussion Paper on the Malicious Use of Domain Names,
the GNSO Council believes that the upcoming review and analysis of this
Discussion Paper may serve to inform the Council of the issues related to
the Meta Issue: Collection and Dissemination of Best Practices
recommendation.

RESOLVED, in regard to the recommendations on cross-TLD Registration Scam
and Domain Kiting/Tasting, the GNSO Council Chair shall communicate to the
Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) the findings of the RAP WG
in this regard and request that the SSAC consider evaluating and/or
monitoring these abuses. If the SSAC elects to conduct this work, the GNSO
Council requests that the SSAC inform the GNSO Council if it believes that
further policy work by the GNSO Council should be undertaken to address
these two types of abuse. In addition, the GNSO Council suggests that the
issue of cross-TLD registration scam be included in the agenda of its next
meeting with the ccNSO Council since this type of abuse may also affect
ccTLDs.

RESOLVED, in response to the recommendation on Meta Issue: Uniformity of
Reporting, the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of this recommendation, and
hereby requests the ICANN Compliance Department to report on existing
systems to report and track violations and/or complaints; improvements /
changes made since the RAPWG Report or foreseen in the near future, and:
identify gaps and any improvements that might be desirable but not foreseen
at this stage. Further consideration of this Meta Issue, including the
recommendations and considerations of the RAP WG in this regard, is deferred
pending receipt of such information from the ICANN Compliance Department.

RESOLVED, in response to the recommendation on Uniformity of Contracts, the
GNSO Council requests an Issue Report to evaluate whether a minimum baseline
of registration abuse provisions should be created for all in scope ICANN
agreements, and if created, how such language would be structured to address
the most common forms of registration abuse.

RESOLVED, in response to the recommendations on Gripe Sites, Deceptive
and/or Offensive Domain Names recommendation #2, and; Cybersquatting
recommendation #2, since the RAPWG did not achieve consensus on these
recommendations, the GNSO Council defers undertaking further policy work on
these recommendations at this time. 

RESOLVED, in response to Gripe Sites; Deceptive and/or Offensive Domain
Names recommendation #1, the GNSO Council acknowledges receipt of this
recommendation, and agrees with the RAPWG that no further action is called
for at this time.     

 

 

 

 

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Zahid Jamil

Barrister-at-law

Jamil & Jamil

Barristers-at-law

219-221 Central Hotel Annexe

Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan

Cell: +923008238230

Tel: +92 21 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025

Fax: +92 21 35655026

 <http://www.jamilandjamil.com/> www.jamilandjamil.com

 

Notice / Disclaimer

This message contains confidential information and its contents are being
communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended
recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.
Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this
message by mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may
contain/are the intellectual property of DNDRC, and constitute privileged
information protected by attorney client privilege. The reproduction,
publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind whatsoever of any part
or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any medium by electronic
means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some other use of this
communication) without prior written permission and consent of DNDRC is
prohibited.