RE: [registrars] OUTCOMES REPORT OF THE GNSO AD HOC GROUP ON DOMAIN NAME TASTING

["John Berryhill" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Isn't this practice... [cart reserve]
>...a violation of provision 3.7.4 [1] of the RAA? 

Not if the customer is logged into their account and payment information is
on file, no.  While a "cart hold" is a fairly decent process as described, I
hear echoes of the old NSI "three month invoice float" that was the mainstay
of speculation circa 1997.

>Why 
>do we need a PDP to deal with this when there is clearly sufficient 
>room in the current contract for ICANN to deal with the practice?

Consider: "general commercial terms extended to creditworthy customers"

I believe one would find that large-scale tasters do indeed have the funds
on hand to theoretically pay for the registrations.  Determining whether
these registrations have been made on "general commercial terms extended to
creditworthy customers" is going to require some information about the
creditworthiness of those customers.  

In the enforcement you envision, then is the registrar going to have to
obtain and transmit to ICANN their customer's bank statement?  And if that
customer has $XXM in the bank, then all's well, unless there is some other
definition of "creditworthy" you have in mind.

Clearly PIR was able to end tasting in .org without engaging the rest of the
community in a PDP.  Verisign could do precisely the same thing, and end
tasting within the same short time scale.  It is a mystery why these
circumstances are the fault of eeeevil registrars.