[lac-discuss-en] Fwd: Recovery of dominions

Thu Sep 10 00:22:31 CDT 2009

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

Subject: Fwd: Recovery of dominions
From: fatimacambronero at gmail.com

In name of Jose Francisco Arce and Fátima Cambronero: 

Thank you very much Jose Barzallo by this contribution that serves us to all 
members of the list to understand a little more on the subject and 
to excite to us by such. 

Now, by questions of lack of time, we come to contribute few 
commentaries adding us to the expressed thing by Jose, that we thought that they can to us 
to serve all, specially to the users of Internet and to those who they have 
that to guard by its interests. 

The interlineados commentaries go. 

2009/9/9 Jose Luis Barzallo <joseluis at barzallo.com> 
> Dear companions ALS and ALAC > > Revise' the documents related to the recovery of names of > dominion in an additional or special term. I send east summary to him stops > to facilitate its participation. > > the essential questions turn around > > - if he is feasible to make these changes? > - If they are necessary? > - As must be the changes to implement itself? > - As the changes must be implemented? > > > For the users the recovery of the dominion names is > advisable in as much as soon as goes in its benefit and the participation of > GNSO in the valid and necessary analysis in. > 

It is necessary to remember that there is a ALAC order so thatthe GNSO is pronounced ( 
http://gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/issues/post-expiration-recovery/report-05dec08-es.pdf). 
The representatives of the users are those that must be pending of which 
this is fulfilled. 
> > That is to say, the recommendations would have to go towardsobtaining a total > transparency in the notification to registrantes the respectto the date of > completion of the period of registry to avoid possible frauds or > manipulation of the warning. > 

In this it is in where there is no a consensus policy and therefore no 
binding for all the Recorders. Each one is handled by the agreements 
that it has signed with ICANN and there is no a solution uniforms that it applies stops 
all equal ones. Some notify through the page Web (is insisted on 
that it is in a visible place; others through a mail (the doubt arises 
respect to which has transferred the name of dominion with 
anteriority and therefore the mail that is registered is the one of the previous one 
to title, and therefore the present one, would not be being been notifying, or at least no 
with fehaciencia and certainty). There is no a form "is transparent", fehaciente 
and safe that it is being used of notification. In this point it would have 
to obtain a binding consensus and therefore, for all the Recorders. 
> > Is fundamental that the burden of proof always has the Recorder and > that this must justify the opportune warning that occurred, this way > will have a greater security respect to which happens to thedominion of > usuary. > > the retention during a special period must be obligatory forall > the recorders and always must count very on clear policies and > public for knowledge of the users. A specific warning respect to > operation would be appropriate. > 

Options have been tried on this, like prohibiting the transference of 
dominion name while it is in period of retention (that of step, each 
recorder establishes the term of.redemption that wants, since with respect to 
it is no a political uniform either), but this option was criticized and 
it stopped being "obligatory" to happen to handle it each voluntarily 
Recorder. 
> > the cost does not have to be superior or low no concept to duplicate the original one > paid by the user. The recorder can retain the dominion during > limited additional period, soon of which it will be able to put to him a value superior > not being part of its responsibility. > 

The Recorder * would have * to retain the dominion during a limited period, 
but that is a uniform term, of public binding knowledge and hestops 
all the Recorders. With respect to the cost, after won said 
period and not recovered by its holder original (or at issue) would have 
to handle itself like a new dominion and with the same cost ofacquiring a dominion 
new, without no original value. This would allow a treatment equality stops 
all the registrantes and/or users. 
> > the transferences between companies or organizations are notdue to accept > related because they would enter doubtful situations respectto his origin. > 

If a policy of consensus for all the Recorders existed by 
equal, with uniform terms, any conflict would not exist in 
transferences between related companies or organizations or no, 
they would eliminate many possibilities of fraud or in damage of third 
other people's. 

The vision that has the association of the end users of Internet, that 
they are consuming of Dominions, and in special with respect to the recovery 
of the expired dominions, it begins with the preoccupation of the lack of 
information of the users of how it is the chain of distribution of 
Dominions; that is to say, the recorders exist and after them there is a series 
of companies that they resell such, and these companies aboundand it is created 
that the secondary market of dominions "or aftermarket is called" * *, this 
it produces in the users a true confusion; added to that many of 
they administer several dominions and they cannot remember thevictory of 
all, although exists some tools to obtain it. This added to that 
at the time of wanting to transfer some dominion the recordermust, in some 
cases of granting to the End user a code to him, which several companies are 
obstinate to do it. The subject at the time of dealing with dominions worsens that 
they try to be sold in 1.4 million dollars, in where the interests in 
game does not allow mistakes, nor double interpretations. 

Let us think that it is necessary to debate these questions and to help users a 
to understand as they are the alternatives of the ways that gTLD crosses from 
ICANN until the user acquires the same one. 

Our work is branched off here in two. One towards ALAC informing to him 
vision of the end user of the Region and another one towards the end users 
in giving them to the tools and basic information so that it can develop 
in freedom. 

>From the association, with Fátima Cambronero, both of Ageia Densi Argentina, 
we are in process of processing of a more extensive document to spread 
these knowledge to the different users and so that they have 
information in a single document and several languages, and does not have 
to digress in pages and forums in search of an answer. The same one will favor a 
the actors of the region to animate itself to touch these subjects and to debate in 
depth such to the aims of being able to raise ALAC a knowledge to him 
certain of the necessities of the subjects in debate and ideas and contributions that go 
directed to favor the user. 

Greetings to All 

Jose F. Arce Fátima Cambronero 

http://ar.ageiadensi.org/ http://ar.ageiadensi.org/ 
_______________________________________________ 

[[--Original text (es)
http://mm2.icann.org/transbot_archive/d06cc201c1.html
--]]