[lac-discuss-es] Rv: [ALAC-Announce] Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings - Initial Report

Mar Mar 19 15:09:09 UTC 2013

Gracias Juan,

Conta conmigo para trabajar en los comentarios sobre este tema.

Saludos

José Arce. -

2013/3/19 Juan Manuel Rojas <jumaropi en yahoo.com>

> Estimada región
>
> Envío la información sobre la apertura de comentarios de UDRP.
>
>
> JUAN MANUEL ROJAS
> Comunicador Social
> Presidente - AGEIA DENSI Colombia
>
> Twitter: @JmanuRojas
>
> Unete a LACRALO:
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Mensaje reenviado -----
> De: At-Large Staff <staff en atlarge.icann.org>
> Para: ALAC Announce <alac-announce en atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> Enviado: Lunes, 18 de marzo, 2013 11:40 A.M.
> Asunto: [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 Subject to UDRP Proceedings  Initial Report
> Comment / Reply Periods (*)
> Comment Open Date:
> 15 March 2013
> Comment Close 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 en 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) Proceedings has published its Initial
> 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
> continue its deliberations and finalize its report for submission to the
> GNSO Council.
> Staff Contact:
> Marika Konings
> Email Staff Contact
> <mailto:Policy-staff en icann.org
> ?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Locki
>
> ng%20of%20a%20Domain%20Name%20Subject%20to%20UDRP%20Proceedings%20%E2%80%93%
> 20Initial%20Report%20public%20comment%20period>
> 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 eleven preliminary
> 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 registrar 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 registrar to 'lock' the domain name registration
> within 2 business days following a 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 is requesting community input 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, should these
> recommendations be adopted 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 further feedback on
> the expected impact should these recommendations be adopted.
>
> The WG would like to encourage all interested parties to submit their
> comments and suggestions so these 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
> is not something that is literally required by the UDRP as written, but is
> a
> practice that 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 a
> complainant must follow in order for a registrar to place a domain name on
> registrar lock, would be desirable.
>
> 2. Whether the creation of an outline of the steps of the process that a
> registrar can reasonably expect to take place during a UDRP dispute would
> be
> desirable.
>
> 3. Whether the time frame by which a registrar must lock a domain after a
> UDRP has been filed should be standardized.
>
> 4a. Whether what constitutes a "locked" domain name should be defined.
>
> 4b. Whether, once a domain name is 'locked' pursuant to a UDRP proceeding,
> the registrant information for that 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 locked subject to a UDRP
> proceeding.
>
> Section III: Document and Resource Links:
> * Locking of a Domain Name Subject to UDRP Proceedings  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
> to be considered in any final summary, analysis, reporting, or
> decision-making that takes place once 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 en atlarge.icann.org
>
>
> One World, One Internet
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC-Announce mailing list
> ALAC-Announce en atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> _______________________________________________
> lac-discuss-es mailing list
> lac-discuss-es en atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
>
> http://www.lacralo.org
>

-- 
Arce, José