ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]


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

Re: [registrars] Proliferation of registrar locks

  • To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx, Registrars@xxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [registrars] Proliferation of registrar locks
  • From: "Paul Lecoultre(CORE secretariat)" <secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:25:32 +0100
  • In-reply-to: <4194FB9E.9000507@tucows.com>
  • References: <4194F648.4070708@corenic.org> <4194FB9E.9000507@tucows.com>
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040910

Hi,

I won't play with words, as you will probably do it better.

The fact is that the current policy never expected that most
of the registrars will switch on by default lock, and that the one
that didn't put the "customer protection" will do it to follow
the trend.

I'm more interested to know why registrars choose to put domains
on lock after reading the policy. How can we expect that customers
will understand the new policy if registrars are doing the contrary?

Some registrars like to answer "let the market choose" and
therefore I ask the question to registrars that switch recently why
they didn't let "the market decide"?

I appreciate all the works that have been done for this policy
and I believe that it will indeed help the community in a way. However
registrars that put a by default lock after reading the policy haven't
at my eyes understand the policy and its purpose.

"I think its appropriate to wait and see what precedents and actions they
(ICANN) take to clarify this in the coming months".

Shouldn't we define instead the first step?

Regards,

Paul








Ross Wm. Rader wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/11/2004 12:43 PM Paul Lecoultre(CORE secretariat) noted that;

| I see a major issue on this behaviour as neither the transfer policy nore
| the dispute resolution policy consider this clearly.

The transfer policy is very clear on the status of lock. I'm not sure
that I see what you are getting at - or at least I'm not seeing the same
thing you are - help me understand. :)

- --




~                       -rwr



Contact info: http://www.blogware.com/profiles/ross
Skydasher: A great way to start your day
My weblog: http://www.byte.org


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)

iD8DBQFBlPue6sL06XjirooRAsB2AJ9NGha1MtqGxevu+y1V+KbZe1udxwCfVPKw
/sh0AbI9p6uXGtnPNnsVerM=
=m6jL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





--
CORE Internet Council of Registrars   http://corenic.org
WTC II, 29 route de Pre-Bois, CH-1215 Geneva, Switzerland
Tel +4122 929-5744 Fax +4122 929-5745 secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxx



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