[lac-discuss-en] Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings - Initial Report
jumaropi at yahoo.com
jumaropi at yahoo.com
Tue Mar 19 14:29:24 UTC 2013
[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]
Subject: Re: Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings - Initial Report
From: jumaropi at yahoo.com
Dear region
Envo the information about opening comments UDRP.
JUAN MANUEL ROJAS
Social Communicator
President-AGEIA DENSIColombia
Twitter: @ JmanuRojas
Join LACRALO:
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
----- Forwarded message -----
From: At-Large Staff <staff at atlarge.icann.org>
To: ALAC Announce <alac-announce at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Posted: Monday, March 18, 2013 11:40 a.m.
Subject: [ALAC-Announce] Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings - Initial Report
https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-15mar13-en.htm
< https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-15mar13-en.htm>
Locking of a Domain Name UDRP Proceedings Subject to Initial Report
Comment / Reply Periods (*)
Open Comment Date:
15 March 2013
Close Comment Date:
26 April 2013 - 23:59 UTC
Reply Open Date:
27 April 2013
Reply Close Date:
17 May 2013 - 23:59 UTC
Important Information Links
Public Comment Announcement
< https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-15mar13-en.htm>
To Submit Your Comments (Forum)
<mailto:comments-locking-domain-name-15mar13 at icann.org>
View Comments Submitted
<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-locking-domain-name-15mar13/>
Brief Overview
Originating Organization:
GNSO
Categories / Tags:
* Policy Processes
Purpose (Brief):
The Generic Names Supporting Organization Working Group tasked with
Addressing the issue of locking of a domain name subject to Uniform Domain
Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) has published its Initial Proceedings
Report for public comment.
Current Status:
The Policy Development Process (PDP) Working Group has published its Initial
Report and is soliciting community input on the Preliminary Recommendations
Contained in the report.
Next Steps:
Following review of the public comments received, the Working Group will
Deliberations continue and finalize its report for submission to its the
GNSO Council.
Staff Contact:
Marika Konings
Staff Email Contact
<mailto:Policy-staff at icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Locki
ng% 20of% 20a% 20Domain 20Name%%% 20to% 20Subject 20UDRP% 20Proceedings% 20% E2% 80% 93%
20Initial% 20Public% 20Report% 20period 20comment%>
Detailed Information
Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose:
In its Initial Report
<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/locking/domain-name-initial-15mar13-en.pdf>
[PDF, 883 KB], the PDP Working Group presents preliminary eleven
Recommendations, Which are expected to usefully Clarify and standardize how
a domain name is locked and unlocked During the course of a UDRP Proceeding
for all parties Involved.Amongst others, These Recommendations include:
* A definition of 'locking' in the context of a UDRP Proceeding - the term
"Lock" means Preventing any changes of registration and registrant [without
impairing the resolution of the domain name] 1
< https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/locking-domain-name-15mar13-en
. Htm # foot1> (Preliminary recommendation # 1)
* Proposed modification of the UDRP rules to no longer require That the
complainant sends a copy of the complaint to the respondent to avoid
cyberflight2
< https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/locking-domain-name-15mar13-en
. Htm # foot2> (Preliminary recommendation # 2)
* Requirement for the record to 'lock' the domain name registration
Following within 2 business days to request for verification from the UDRP
Provider (Preliminary recommendation # 3)
* Clarifying How To Deal With changes to contact information and / or lifting
of proxy / privacy services (Preliminary recommendation # 7 and # 8)
* Clarifying the process for the unlocking of a domain name registration
Following the Conclusion of a UDRP proceeding (Preliminary recommendation
# 9)
In Addition to These Recommendations, the WG has put forward two possible
options in its report to Clarify the process in case a settlement is Reached
and community input is Requesting On These two options or possible
alternatives.
It is important to Emphasize That Most Of These preliminary Recommendations
codify existing practices in line With The UDRP and are not expected to
require any changes to the existing policy. However, These Should
be ADOPTED Recommendations In Their current form, minor changes may need to
be made to the UDRP Rules and / or UDRP Provider supplemental rules.
Those interested in Providing input are Strongly Encouraged to Especially
review section 5 and 6 of the Initial Report in Order to Obtain a Further
Understanding Concerning the WG's thinking and rationale With Regards to
These Recommendations as well as further details with Respect to the
preliminary recommendations. In Addition to input on the preliminary
Recommendations, the WG is Also interested to receive feedback on Further
the expected impact These Recommendations Should be ADOPTED.
The WG would like to Encourage all interested parties to submit Their
These comments and suggestions so can be Considered as the WG Continues its
Deliberations in view of finalizing its report and Recommendations in the
next phase of the policy development process.
1
< https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/locking-domain-name-15mar13-en
. Htm # text1> The WG is Considering adding the bracketed language and would
welcome community input on the Proposed addition.
2
< https://www.icann.org/en/news/public-comment/locking-domain-name-15mar13-en
. Htm # text2> Cyberflight In This context means changing the registrant
Information With The Intent to escape from the dispute.
Section II: Background:
The "locking" of a domain name registration Associated with UDRP proceedings
That is something is not literally required by the UDRP as written, but is a
That practice has Developed around it. As a result, there is no uniform
approach, Which has resulted in confusion and Misunderstandings. To address
This Issue, the GNSO Council Decided to initiate a Policy Development
Process on 15 December 2011. As part of its Deliberations, the WG was
Required to Consider the following questions:
1. Whether the creation of an outline of a Proposed procedure, Which to
complainant must follow in order to register for a domain name to place on
record lock, would be desirable.
2. Whether the creation of an outline of the steps of the process That a
record can reasonably expect to take place During a UDRP dispute would be
desirable.
3. Whether the time frame by Which to register a domain must lock after a
Has been filed UDRP Should be standardized.
4a. Whether what constitutes a "locked" Domain Name Should be defined.
4b.Whether, eleven domain name is 'locked' pursuant to a UDRP proceeding,
That the registrant information for domain name may be changed or modified.
5. Whether additional Safeguards Should be created for the protection of
registrants in cases where the domain name is subject to a UDRP locked
proceeding.
Section III: Document and Resource Links:
* Locking of a Domain Name UDRP Proceedings Subject to Initial Report -
http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/locking/domain-name-initial-15mar13-en.pdf
<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/locking/domain-name-initial-15mar13-en.pdf>
[PDF, 883 KB]
* Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy -
http://www.icann.org/en/help/dndr/udrp/policy
< https://www.icann.org/en/help/dndr/udrp/policy>
* Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy -
http://www.icann.org/en/help/dndr/udrp/rules
< https://www.icann.org/en/help/dndr/udrp/rules>
* Working Group Workspace - https://community.icann.org/x/xq3bAQ
< https://community.icann.org/x/xq3bAQ>
Section IV: Additional Information:
N / A
(*) Comments submitted after the posted Close Date / Time are not guaranteed
Considered to be any end in summary, analysis, reporting, or
That decision-making takes place eleven this period lapses.
**********
Regards,
Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie
Peregrine and Julia Charvolen
ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC
E-mail: staff at atlarge.icann.org
One World, One Internet
_______________________________________________
[[--Original text (es)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/6acb2e6e4e.html
--]]
More information about the lac-discuss-en
mailing list