Re: [ga] Reminder/Notice: Effective Dates for New Consensus Policies

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

I think your history is right on the money here. And to take it from a lawyers point of view representing registrars I would keep it just the way it is.
>From the consumers side I would make it just as you say it should be.
>From a beauracrats point of view I would establish penalty gradiants and a short method of proof required for enforceability.
All three would would have a trickle down, at the least, effect on the consumer in the negative. Whenever we penalize a producer we eventually pass the cost to the consumer.
It appears that the benefits of establishing marketing lists and the scooping up of domain names is the backend profit margin for registrars and registries. I note many ccTLDs also establish census concepts through the process.
 
I am afraid, or delighted I suppose, that ICANN is not a regulatory body but rather a standards setting organization. Consensus is the only way in which an industry standard may be obtained and/or broken. I think it would be wise to set your position as a standard and as a simple dotcommoner I would hope that the industry would self regulate itself in accordance with that principle.
 
Eric


Richard Henderson <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Are Consensus policies *mandatory* for all ICANN-accredited registrars? Or are they only voluntary?
snip
 
The term "consensus policy" should be replaced by "terms and conditions", and failure to adhere to these terms and conditions should result in removal of accreditation or even denial of the right to trade through the Registries.
 
The reason for this approach is *the protection of the consumer* - that faraway entity, which ICANN seems to marginalise, which was once the free and elected At Large
 
Yrs,
 
Richard Henderson
 

		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!