RE: [registrars] Registrar Resolution
Jon, thanks for letting me know that, it's a big improvement. I don't think it's perfect, but it's good enough for Registration Technologies, Inc., NameStream.com, Inc. and SaveMore Names.com, Inc. to endorse. Best, Jim--On Wednesday, March 21, 2007 4:02 PM -0400 "Nevett, Jonathon" <jnevett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Jim: Fly-by-night was removed -- please see my note from earlier today. http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/registrars/msg04632.html Best, Jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Archer Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2007 3:46 PM To: Registrar Constituency Subject: Re: [registrars] Registrar Resolution I think the "fly-by-night" description is completely unneeded and gratuitous. There is no generally accepted definition of that term and I think it can be misconstrued as a slight against smaller registrars, or in the worst case as the RC trying to make an argument that smaller registrars can not be trusted. Any business entity, large or small, ethical or unethical, can fold for a variety of reasons. I's sure that many of us can recall the "bad acts" of registrar industry leaders. So how about we just drop the "fly by night" stuff, and say something like:Whereas, registrants must be protected against the potential bad acts ofregistries and registrars;Also, what has this clause got to do with anything:Whereas, registrars only succeed if they provide valuable services totheir customers;I don't see that as relevant or a valuable addition to the resolution. Every time the resolution strays off topic it looses some of it's impact. Also, the fly-by-night stuff makes an unwarranted implication. I ask that the resolution be changed accordingly. Thanks... Jim --On Wednesday, March 21, 2007 5:07 AM -0700 Robert Birkner <robertb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------Whereas, registrars only succeed if they provide valuable services totheir customers;Whereas, registrants must be protected against the potential bad acts of“fly-by-night” registries and registrars;Whereas, it is incumbent on ICANN to protect registrants against thepotential bad acts of “fly-by-night” gTLD registries and registrars;Whereas, ICANN Staff has recently formulated a new Compliance Program forgTLD Registries and Registrars;Whereas, ICANN Staff has recently announced its success in furthering adata escrow requirement for gTLD registrieshttp://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-05mar07.htm;Whereas, ICANN Staff has not yet specified a schedule, terms, or a formatof a data escrow requirement for gTLD registrars;Whereas, many registrars currently secure registrant and domain name datathrough various back-up methods, but that this practice is by no meansuniform or compulsory across all accredited registrars;Whereas, the various back-up methods used by registrars may not besufficient in all cases to assist ICANN Staff in recovering such data inthe event of registrar business failure; andWhereas, recent events have highlighted the need for a registrar dataescrow program and enhanced compliance efforts with regard torequirements in the Registrar Accreditation Agreement.Be it resolved that the undersigned registrars call for ICANN Staff towork with the ICANN Registrar Constituency to finalize the terms of agTLD registrar data escrow program; andBe it further resolved that the undersigned registrars call for ICANNStaff to work with the ICANN Registrar Constituency to improve theeffectiveness of the ICANN Compliance Program for gTLD Registrars.******************************* James W. Archer CEO Registration Technologies, Inc. http://www.RegistrationTek.com ******************************* James W. Archer CEO Registration Technologies, Inc. http://www.RegistrationTek.com
|