Re: [ga] Opposed to VeriSign's proposed com/net Anti-Abuse Policy, due to lack of due process

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thank you, George for flagging the issue..
> From the application I lift these questions and Verisign's answer:
d. Were consultations with end users appropriate? Which groups were 
consulted? What were the nature and
content of these consultations?:
answer:
"As a registry operator, Verisign did not consult with the registrants of 
.com/.net/.name domain names."
Interesting answer.  "As a registry operator", Verisign has all the means to 
consult its registrants and poll them on  issues of due process.
I agree with George that consultations with registrants should take place, 
because they would be entirely appropriate.
ICANN needs to reject  applications that lack due process or it needs to 
make it possible for such consultations to take place in a credible way, 
prior to approval.
The issue of registrant representation in ICANN needs to be revisited. 
Elected representatives can phrase the questions that Registry operators 
need to submit for a wide online poll.
Joop


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "George Kirikos" <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "GNSO GA Mailing List" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 3:26 PM
Subject: [ga] Opposed to VeriSign's proposed com/net Anti-Abuse Policy, due 
to lack of due process

> Hi folks,
>
> VeriSign has submitted an application to ICANN for an Anti-Abuse policy 
> for com/net domain names:
> http://www.icann.org/en/registries/rsep/#2011008
>
>
> We oppose that application, as it does not provide any due process to 
> domain name registrants. VeriSign would become the judge, jury and 
> executioner, able to suspend or delete domain names that are allegedly 
> "abusive".
> VeriSign even recognizes that legitimate domain names will be affected. To 
> attempt to mitigate these "false positives", VeriSign proposes that 
> legitimate registrants would only be able to protest *after* VeriSign has 
> already taken action. Such action would have already damaged the innocent 
> registrants and their users.
> This is counter to the domain name registrants' rights to due process. 
> Instead, VeriSign should be compelled to prove the alleged abuse in an 
> appropriate legal forum (e.g. a court), where the registrants can face 
> their accuser, before being allowed to suspend or delete a domain name.
> If ICANN is going to permit this policy to go forward without due process 
> changes, VeriSign should be required to carry liability insurance in the 
> amount of $100 million for each act of suspension/deletion. This would 
> allow registrants to recover financially in the event that VeriSign is 
> found guilty of suspending/deleting a domain name that was not in fact 
> "abusive."
> Sincerely,
>
> George Kirikos
> http://www.leap.com/