AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
Page History
| Comment Close Date | Statement Name | Status | Assignee(s) and | Call for Comments | Call for Comments Close | Vote Announcement | Vote Open | Vote Reminder | Vote Close | Date of Submission | Staff Contact and Email | Statement Number |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18.11.2012 | Expired Registration Recovery Policy | VotingAdopted* Statement will be posted shortly | Alan Greenberg (NARALO) | 27.11.2012 | 30.11.2012 00:00 UTC | 30.11.2012 18:00 UTC | 30.11.2012 20:00 UTC | 05.12.2012 | 06.12.2012 | 07.12.2012 | Steve Gobin steve.gobin@icann.org | TBCAL/ALAC/ST/1212/1 |
* Status will be confined to the following terms: Drafting, Commenting, Voting, Adopted, Rejected, Suspended, No consensus, No statement, To Be Confirmed (TBC), Other
...
(*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date/Time are not guaranteed to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or decision-making that takes place once this period lapses.
FINAL
...
VERSION TO BE SUBMITTED IF RATIFIED
The final Statement in PDF format is version to be added here submitted, if the draft below is ratified.
...
, will be placed here by 07.12.2012 23:59 UTC.
FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC
The PEDNR PDP recommended that information about renewal fees and how a registrar will contact a registrant should be readily made available on the registrar web site (Rec. 5 & 6). It was the clear intent of the recommendations that this apply to ALL registrants.
Paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2 of the ERRP (http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/consensus-policies/errp/draft-policy-11oct12-en.pdf) require, among other things, that if a registrar operates a web site, certain information must be clearly displayed there. Paragraphs 4.1.2 and 4.2.3 require that a reseller, if one is used, must similarly display this information.
...
Without these two paragraphs, there is no obligation for a registrar to ensure that a reseller displays this information and a significant percentage of registrants, those who deal with resellers, may be deprived of this information. The access to this information that the PDP was attempting to ensure is no longer guaranteed, and the registrar, by subcontracting services to a reseller, has effectively been relieved from fulfilling these RAA obligations. This calls into question the value of the immense time and energy that the community puts into developing PDP Consensus Policy Recommendations and indeed the effectiveness of the entire RAA. Resellers are responsible for a large percentage of gTLD registrations, particularly those by individual users, and they should be afforded the FULL protection of their rights under the RAA.
