ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]

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

Re: [registrars] Grave Robbing and SEDO Fencing

  • To: Lau <richard@xxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [registrars] Grave Robbing and SEDO Fencing
  • From: Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:30:09 -0400
  • Cc: "'Paul Lecoultre (CORE secretariat)'" <secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "'Registrars Constituency'" <registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <0039EEAD3EF949EF9E7D6F995248C4DB@MrLauPC>
  • Organization: Tucows Inc.
  • References: <20070807050000.4a871ae7d05d2c98d9abb595d392cd69.3d794c1cfe.wbe@email.secureserver.net> <46B867E7.7040802@corenic.org> <00247718448940929E43AAED0EA14F1C@MrLauPC> <46B879AA.20509@tucows.com> <0039EEAD3EF949EF9E7D6F995248C4DB@MrLauPC>
  • Reply-to: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728)
Again, another fallacy. Changing the name of the registrant in a database doesn't change who the legal registrant is. Whomever entered into the original agreement with the registrar is the registrant, unless those rights are legally assigned to another third party (i.e. as part of a sales transaction).
I am not sure why a transfer dispute provider would rule against the legal owner in a situation like this (assuming that the registrant was able to prove ownership, etc.). I can understand a "no finding". The TDRP shouldn't be examining whether process was followed, but rather, that the wishes of the registrant have been executed. I can understand why resolution providers might examine process, but to rely on it solely to determine outcome seems shortsighted. 

Lau wrote:

Ok, let me rephrase...

If the Registrant and Admin are fraudulently changed, and then a Transfer is
processed, then according to the TDP and the Gaining Registrar, the transfer
is fine. 
If however, the Losing Registrar agrees that the listed Registrant was not
actually the Registrant due to an internal error or fraudulent change, then
yes, I can see that the TDP would apply.

Any real world experiences where the Losing Registrar admits to a fraud
happening on their end when the Gaining Registrar is fighting the TDP
(claiming that all process was followed)?

Thx

Richard

-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Rader [mailto:ross@xxxxxxxxxx] Sent: 07 August, 2007 2:55 PM 
To: Lau
Cc: 'Paul Lecoultre (CORE secretariat)'; 'Registrars Constituency'
Subject: Re: [registrars] Grave Robbing and SEDO Fencing

Lau wrote:


Am I wrong? (Please, someone, tell me that I am).
The subtlety that tends to get missed is that the transfer policy hinges on whether or not the registrant, or the admin at the behest of the registrant, approved the transfer of registrar. I am not sure why this has been interpreted as "if the admin approved it, it must be good", but this has been the case since the policy was implemented. If the registrant hasn't agreed to it, even if the admin has, it is technically a bad transfer. 




--
Regards,

Ross Rader
Director, Retail Services
Tucows Inc.

http://www.domaindirect.com
t. 416.538.5492
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>