ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] ICANN's accredited registrars and trying to renew one name

  • To: "L. Gallegos" <jandl@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] ICANN's accredited registrars and trying to renew one name
  • From: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
  • Cc: Richard Henderson <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <ga@xxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <3F4B8CC7.21034.455DA268@localhost>
  • Reply-to: Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Tue, 26 Aug 2003, L. Gallegos wrote:

> Personally, the issue your facing could be avoided by making registries go back to 
> the thick model and having the registry itself ultimately responsible for ensuring 
> there is no hanky panky with domain renewals. 

There's another possible course - one that is particularly American -
one can initiate a legal action for breech of contract.

You have, of course, examined your registation agreement to see if you 
have agreed to not do that.

If your registrar has a contract under which you have agreed to limit the
liability of the registrar, then switch registrars to one that puts no
such limitation in their contract.

If you were to perchance find that all the registrars have essentially
identical contract terms limititing liability to nothing more than the
price paid, then there is an interesting case that can be made that there
is no real competition in the marketplace.

(I just skimmed the agreement of one of the registrars I use and I saw
what amounts to a near total disclaimer of liability, both under contract
and tort law, and a limitation of liability to the amount of the
registration fee - in other words, near banditry.  The dominant registrar
has terms with similar effect in its agreement.)


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>