[At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Where is the promised Comprehensive Review of ICANN Accreditation Processes?

[Danny Younger]

Eduardo,

Every ICANN-accredited registrar is required to complete the Shared Registry System Registrar Accreditation Application -- see http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/accreditation-application.htm

This document requires the applicant to disclose certain details such as "business address of the entity applicant".  

ICANN has stated "ICANN intends to conduct registrar accreditation in as open and transparent a manner as feasible. To that end, ICANN will be free to disclose and use information submitted in connection with an application in any manner and to anyone it deems appropriate" -- see http://www.icann.org/en/registrars/instructions.htm

Apparently, ICANN has not deemed it appropriate to disclose accurate registrar contact details to the general public (otherwise, all of these applications would have been publicly posted which is what one would expect if ICANN actually were a transparent organization).

However, we have the right under the ICANN Accountability & Transparency Frameworks and Principles document (approved by the ICANN Board in New Delhi) to request unpublished information:

"If a member of the public requests information not already publicly available, ICANN will respond, to the extent feasible, to reasonable requests within 30 calendar days of receipt of the request. If that time
frame will not be met, ICANN will inform the requester in writing as to when a response will be provided, setting forth the reasons necessary for the extension of time to respond. If ICANN denies the information request, it will provide a written statement to the requestor identifying the reasons for the denial."

If members of the NARALO agree, we can invoke our right to ask for the publication of these registrar accreditation applications.  I wouldn't mind taking this topic up at our next monthly meeting...

Danny




--- On Thu, 9/4/08, Eduardo Diaz <ediaz at prtc.net> wrote:

> From: Eduardo Diaz <ediaz at prtc.net>
> Subject: RE: [NA-Discuss] Where is the promised Comprehensive Review of ICANN Accreditation Processes?
> To: dannyyounger at yahoo.com, at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Cc: na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 5:00 PM
> There should be complete transparency in this, otherwise it
> gives the
> impression that these registrars are doing something
> illegal. 
> 
>  
> 
> So which committee/organization do we approach to start
> discussing and
> change this?
> 
>  
> 
> Eduardo Diaz
> 
> ISOC-PR
> 
>  
> 
>  -----Original Message-----
> From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> [mailto:na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On
> Behalf Of Danny
> Younger
> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 9:03 AM
> To: at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Cc: na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Subject: [NA-Discuss] Where is the promised Comprehensive
> Review of ICANN
> Accreditation Processes?
> 
>  
> 
> Source:  http://www.knujon.com/news.html
> 
>  
> 
> Phantom Registrars
> 
>  
> 
> In investigating the 48 Directi-owned Registrars with
> questionable
> locations, we reported facts. The address used by many of
> these Registrars:
> "14525 SW Millikan Way Beaverton, OR 97005-2343"
> is the address of a mail
> forwarding service called Earthclassmail. According to
> Directi, the listed
> companies are registered in Delaware, but not in Oregon or
> New York as
> listed in the ICANN Directory. Directi is headquartered in
> Mumbai, India.
> KnujOn feels that any company given so much responsibility
> over the Internet
> should fully disclose where they are located, but this is
> apparently not an
> ICANN requirement.
> 
>  
> 
> Indeed, Stacy Burnette, director of contractual compliance
> at ICANN, said
> the organization is satisfied the registrars are
> incorporated in the
> location listed in their application. Telephone numbers in
> the contact
> information need not correspond to the location of
> incorporation, she said.
> ICANN doesn't require registrars to publicly disclose
> their place of
> incorporation.
> 
>  
> 
> To which KnujOn says: Huh? So, as the expression goes,
> don't hate the player
> hate the game. Directi merely acquired these accreditations
> by ICANN's own
> rules. Summary: One address in the application, a second
> address disclosed
> to the public. Read this line again: "ICANN
> doesn't require registrars to
> publicly disclose their place of incorporation." How
> does this figure into
> ICANN's mission to be an open and transparent
> organization? "Telephone
> numbers in the contact information need not correspond to
> the location of
> incorporation". How can there be any accountability?
> This situation is
> upside-down. Registrants are required to list their valid
> contact
> information, but the Registrars who sponsor their domains
> are not. 
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>       
> 
>  
> 
> ------
> 
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> 
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> 
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica
> nn.org
> 
>  
> 
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> 
> ------
> 
>  
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> 
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
> 
> Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.16/1651 - Release
> Date: 9/4/2008
> 6:57 AM