Re: [dow1-2tf] Expanded "step by step" procedure re conflicts with local law

[Marc Schneiders <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks, Jordyn. Perhaps we could include this language in the
proposed text?

On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, at 18:14 [=GMT-0400], Jordyn A. Buchanan wrote:

> Marc:
>
> The original language from TF #2 did provide an exception in cases in
> which a registrar was forced to take immediate action by a regulator.
>
> I believe that the intent of the task force (although it is not spelled
> out in detail in the agreed upon language, and I am doing a bit of
> interpretation here) was that when a situation arises in which there is
> a demonstrated conflict between ICANN contract requirements on WHOIS
> and national law, the registrar should not be penalized by ICANN as a
> result of complying with national law.
>
> Jordyn
>
> On Oct 4, 2004, at 6:07 PM, Marc Schneiders wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 4 Oct 2004, at 12:16 [=GMT-0400], Steven J. Metalitz IIPA
> > wrote:
> >
> >> This procedure assumes continued
> >> compliance with contractual obligations throughout the process until
> >> the
> >> issue is resolved.
> >
> > Unless the national law isn't patient enough and will close down
> > operations of a registrar...
> >
> > Whois would go out of the air then anyway. Which would not bother me
> > that much. But the domains might also stop functioning in as far as
> > the registrar is also involved in the DNS.  That would be a pity. And
> > not good for the stability of the internet etc.
> >
> > I think we need provisions for situations where national law isn't
> > patient enough to wait for the periods specified in the proposal.
> >
> > ICANN doesn't have an army.
> >
> >
>