[ALAC] Compliance PIC enforcement

[h.raiche at internode.on.net]

 Agree- good catch and yes, a formal letter is a good suggestion - 
happy to let Alan with his knowledge of this do the hard yards 
 
 Holly 
 
 On Wed 26/03/14 5:17 PM , Evan Leibovitch evan at telly.org sent: 
 Good catch, Alan. I agree that such a question should be filled. 
 On Mar 26, 2014 11:53 AM, "Alan Greenberg"  wrote: 
 
 > At the meeting between Compliance and ALAC on Sunday, Maguy 
reported that 
 > there is a form on the ICANN web site for reporting alleged PIC 
violations. 
 > 
 > At the public compliance session today, it became clear that this 
form was 
 > related to the PICDRP (http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/ [1] 
 > applicants/agb/picdrp-19dec13-en.pdf). 
 > 
 > The PICDRP is ostensibly applicable only if the complainant can 
claim it 
 > has been harmed by the alleged non-compliance. 
 > 
 > To quote: "1.1 Any person or entity that believes they have been 
harmed as 
 > a result of a Registry Operator's act or omission in connection 
with the 
 > operation of its gTLD that is non-compliant with its PICs may 
report such 
 > alleged non-compliance by the Registry Operator ("Reporter")." 
 > 
 > During the session question period, I explicitly asked whether the 
process 
 > was applicable if the complainant does not claim any harm to the 
 > complainant. 
 > 
 > The answer was less than crystal clear. We were told that 
Compliance would 
 > evaluate the complaint and decide whether it had merit (including 
following 
 > up with the complainant if the submitted information was 
insufficient). On 
 > specific questioning of whether they would consider it a valid 
complaint if 
 > no harm was demonstrated, there was not a definitive answer. 
Related to 
 > this is my understanding that even if a complaint *was* forwarded 
to the 
 > Standing Panel, the rules under which it will operate would not 
allow it to 
 > find for the complainant with harm being demonstrated. 
 > 
 > I would suggest that the ALAC file an explicit written question 
with 
 > compliance on this issue, since it is effectively the SAME question 
that we 
 > have been asking for over a year now. 
 > 
 > I would be happy to draft such a letter. 
 > 
 > Alan 
 > 
 > _______________________________________________ 
 > ALAC mailing list 
 > ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
 > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac [2] 
 > 
 > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org [3] 
 > ALAC Working Wiki: 
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large [4]+ 
 > Advisory+Committee+(ALAC) 
 > 
 _______________________________________________ 
 ALAC mailing list 
 ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
 https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac [5] 
 
 At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org [6] 
 ALAC Working Wiki: 
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC 
[7]) 
 
  
 
Links: 
------ 
[1] 
http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fnewgtlds.icann.org%2Fen%2F 
[2] 
http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fatlarge-lists.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Falac 
[3] 
http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.atlarge.icann.org 
[4] 
http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.icann.org%2Fdisplay%2Fatlarge%2FAt-Large 
[5] 
http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fatlarge-lists.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Falac 
[6] 
http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.atlarge.icann.org 
[7] 
http://webmail-old.internode.on.net/parse.php?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.icann.org%2Fdisplay%2Fatlarge%2FAt-Large%2BAdvisory%2BCommittee%2B%28ALAC