AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
Page History
Comment Close Date | Statement Name | Status (Please click "Adopted" to download a copy of the Final Statement) | 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 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
20.04.2012 | Adopted | Alan Greenberg (NARALO) | 01.04.2012 | 11.04.2012 | 13.04.2012 | 13.04.2012 | 18.04.2012 | 19.04.2012 | 20.04.2012 | Marika Konings marika.konings@icann.org | AL/ALAC/ST/0412/5 |
Comment/Reply Periods (*) | Important Information Links* Public Comment Announcement | |||
Comment Open: | 21 March 2012 | |||
Comment Close: | 20 April 2012 | |||
Close Time (UTC): | 23:59 UTC | |||
Reply Open: | 21 April 2012 | |||
Reply Close: | 11 May 2012 | |||
Close Time (UTC): | 23:59 UTC | |||
Brief Overview |
| |||
Originating Organization: | GNSO Council | |||
Categories/Tags: | Top-Level Domains | |||
Purpose (Brief): | On 6 March 2012, the Fake Renewal Notices Drafting Team submitted its report | |||
Current Status: | The GNSO Council is requesting input on the Fake Renewal Notices Report. | |||
Next Steps: | The GNSO Council will review the comments received and consider next steps to address the issue of fake renewal notices. | |||
Staff Contact: | Marika Konings | |||
Email: | ||||
Detailed Information |
| |||
Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose | Fake renewal notices are misleading correspondence sent to registrants from an individual or organization claiming to be or to represent the current registrar. These are sent for a variety of deceptive purposes. The desired action as a result of the deceptive notification is:* Pay an unnecessary fee (fraud)* Get a registrant to switch registrars unnecessarily ("slamming", or illegitimate market-based switching)* Reveal credentials or provide authorization codes to facilitate theft of the domainThe Registration Abuse Policies Working Group discussed this type of abuse in its Final Report
| |||
Section II: Background | Prior to acting on the recommendation of the Registration Abuse Policies (RAP) Working Group to request an Issue Report on fake renewal notices, the GNSO Council decided it would be desirable to gather further information on this issue and it therefore resolved: 'The GNSO Council hereby requests that the Registrar Stakeholder Group provide further information and data on the nature and scope of the issue of Fake Renewal Notices to help inform the GNSO Council's and its RAPWG deliberations no whether an Issue Report should be requested. A small group of volunteers consisting of registrar representatives and others interested (including former RAP WG members) should be formed to prepare such a request, work with the Registrar Stakeholder Group to obtain the information requested and report back to the GNSO Council accordingly'. | |||
Section III: Document and Resource Links | Fake Renewal Notices Report | |||
Section IV: Additional Information | None |
(*) 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 SUBMITTED DRAFT
Please click here to download a copy of the PDF below.
|
DRAFT ALAC Statement on Fake Renewal Notices Report
...
The ALAC would consider it acceptable to add this issue to the current IRTP C PDP, but questions whether this is possible given that it was not included in the Issue Report leading to this PDP.
Adding this issue to the next IRTP D PDP is certainly possible, but the delay before even starting would be considerable. IRTP C is currently scheduled to report to the GNSO Council in October 2012. Even assuming no delays, given the lengthy process associated with GNSO approval and then starting the next IRTP PDP, the new one might optimistically start early in 2013.
3. Add the issue to the upcoming RAA PDP
Again, this is possible, but it would be one small item in a large and potentially complicated PDP. It is impossible to estimate how long that PDP would take, again delaying this issue indeterminably.
4. Refer the issue to the ALAC to encourage better education and awareness
The ALAC is neither funded nor staffed to undertake such a project. Although At-Large is certainly willing to take the issue and widely disseminate such warnings, any more active action is not possible, and in any case would not likely have the penetration to be even partially successful. As such, the ALAC would be willing to participate in any education and awareness program (regardless of how the overall problem is addressed), it cannot be the main method of addressing the problem.
5. Raise the issue with the Federal Trade Commission in the US
Although this may well address an issue with a particular Registrar as long as they are located in the US, it does not seem to be a very robust solution to the problem.
...