Page History
...
Tip | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Apologies: Crystal Ondo (RrSG), Steinar Grøtterød (At-Large), James Galvin (RySG), John Woodworth (ISPCP) Alternates: Essie Musailov (RrSG), Lutz Donnerhacke (At-Large), Beth Bacon (RySG) |
Note |
---|
Notes/ Action Items
Action Items: Denial of Transfers (NACKing): ACTION ITEMS:
Bulk Transfers: ACTION ITEM: WG members to review the charter questions and consider whether they need to be modified or added to, particularly, b5 which is about bulk use of Auth Info Codes, and whether the other two charter questions that relate to ICANN approved transfers need to be addressed in Phase 1A.
Transfer Policy Review Phase 1 - Meeting #37 Tuesday 22 February 2022 at 16:00 UTC
2. Welcome & Chair updates (5 minutes)
3. Continued deliberations on Denial of Transfers (NACKing) (60 minutes) -- see: Working document [docs.google.com] Charter Question: h1) Are the current reasons for denying or NACK-ing a transfer sufficiently clear? Should additional reasons be considered? For instance, ICANN Contractual Compliance has observed difficulties from registrars tying transfer denials involving domain names suspended for abusive activities to the denial instances contemplated by the Transfer Policy; or should any reasons be removed? In considering this question, the WG may wish to consider:
ICANN Org Compliance Input on Denial of Transfers:
Discussion:
ACTION ITEM: Staff to add as a suggestion to the MAY list that a registrar MAY deny a transfer if that transfer violates its registration agreement or terms of service. Poll to aid in discussion: NOTE: Some of the provisions below are only displayed in part due to character limits in the polling tool. In such cases, the text ends with “. . .”
Reasons that the Registrar of Record MAY deny a transfer request 3.7.1 Evidence of fraud.
Discussion:
ACTION ITEM: WG members to review suggested revisions provided by Sarah Wyld. 3.7.2 Reasonable dispute over the identity of the Registered Name Holder or Administrative Contact.
Discussion:
3.7.3 No payment for previous registration period (including credit card charge-backs) if the domain name is past its expiration date or for previous or current registration periods if the domain name has not yet expired. . .
Discussion:
3.7.4 Express objection to the transfer by the authorized Transfer Contact. . .
Discussion:
ACTION ITEM: WG members to add language to 3.7.4 to update it and make it clearer. 3.7.5 The transfer was requested within 60 days of the creation date as shown in the registry Whois record for the domain name.
Discussion:
4. Begin discussion on bulk use cases (15 minutes – time permitting) ACTION ITEM: WG members to review the charter questions and consider whether they need to be modified or added to, particularly, b5 which is about bulk use of Auth Info Codes, and whether the other two charter questions that relate to ICANN approved transfers need to be addressed in Phase 1A. 5. AOB (5 minutes)
|