[ga] NSI & Expired domain names -- violation of consensus deletions policy??

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

At the Carthage, Tunisia meeting of the ICANN Board, the minutes:

http://www.icann.org/announcements/advisory-31oct03.htm

*adopted* the Deletion Policy Recommendations of the GNSO (see the
heading "Adoption of GNSO Council Domain Deletion Policy
Recommendations" in the minutes)

The deletions policy is at:

http://www.icann.org/carthage/deletes-topic.htm

My understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) is that those are now
*Consensus Policies".

1) Why, as a Consensus Policy, is it not listed at:

http://www.icann.org/general/consensus-policies.htm

2) Several new services would appear to be in violation of the
Consensus Deletions Policy. In particular, Network Solutions will now
auction expired domains BEFORE they would have naturally deleted:

http://www.networksolutions.com/en_US/name-it/pending.jhtml

As per the announcement by SnapNames at:

http://www.domainstate.com/showthread.php3?s=&threadid=33201

"Starting today, if a domain name at Network Solutions expires and is
not renewed, the domain will immediately be awarded to the holder of a
SnapBack subscription on that name. If there is more than one SnapBack
subscription on a particular name, the name will become the object of a
short auction among the interested parties, andwill be eventually
awarded to the auction winner.

Network Solutions will start checking to see if domains have a SnapBack
on them within a few hours from now. Any Netsol registered names with
an expiry date of 8/12, 8/13 or 8/14 could be part of this, so you may
want to enter those domains into your SN account as soon as possible."

3) It is my belief that the above system violates the consensus policy,
in particular:

"At the conclusion of the registration period, failure by or on behalf
of the Registered Name Holder to consent that the registration be
renewed within the time specified in a second notice or reminder shall,
in the absence of extenuating circumstances, result in cancellation of
the registration by the end of the auto-renew grace period (although
registrars may choose to cancel the name earlier)."

The relevant wording is "shall.....result in cancellation" (NOT "may").
NSI appears to be taking control of the relevant domains, without
explicit permission of the Registered Name Holders, in order to profit
from their expiry, when it appears to be their duty that the domains be
cancelled, to provide equivalent access to all other registrars to
register the cancelled domain name.

4) By virtue of NSI's former monopoly (meaning they have control of
many of the best expiring domains, which were registered in the early
1990s), this new system is anti-competitive, forcing prospective
registrants to continue to deal with Network Solutions and its partners
for the registration of the desired domain name, instead of the 
current method where the name would expire and be caught using a
variety of competitive domain-catching services.

5) ICANN should put a stop to this practice, and ensure that domains
are either deleted, OR that any such auctions take place only with
explicit permission of the Registered Name Holders (without the
registrar stepping in as a "proxy", having transferred the domains to
themselves without the permission of the prior registrant). "Explicit"
would be "opt-in", and NOT a *failure* to opt-out.

6) The above system by NSI appears to also violate the principles of
the Redemption Grace Period, because names would be siphoned off to
SnapNames bidders BEFORE the domains would have entered RGP. This
obviously hurts existing registrants, through the usurpation of their
rights by NSI.

8) Litigation will almost ceertainly ensue if the above NSI system
continues. Perhaps ICANN should now step in and do something, to ensure
that the obligations of registrars are being met?

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/