[RAA-WG] Starting the discussion

[Danny Younger]

Vittorio,

I object to your approach.  Our obligation is not "to
work out our statement".  

The board put forward the three following resolutions:

Resolved (07.__), the Board directs staff to solicit
and consider the input of the Internet community,
including the At-Large community and the GNSO
constituencies, regarding proposed changes to the RAA,
registrar accreditation process, and related policies.


Resolved (07.__), the Board requests that staff engage
with the Registrars Constituency in order to arrive
at, and post for public comment, a set of proposed
amendments or alternative version to the RAA, that is
intended to address to the extent feasible the
concerns raised by the Internet community. 

Resolved (07.___), that when the RAA is published for
public comment, that notice be provided to allow the
At-Large Advisory Committee, the GNSO, and other
interested parties to review the proposed revised RAA
and provide advice to the Board in its review. 

The first resolution allows us to put the input of the
at-large community into the hands of ICANN Staff so
that such input may be considered by Staff in order
that ICANN may arrive at proposed amendments or an
alternate version of the RAA.  That input is already a
matter of record; we don't require any ALAC-member or
RALO-member pontifications.  There are thousands of
comments pertaining to the Registerfly debacle out
there, and it is our duty to collect and aggregate
these comments (fact-finding) and present them in
reasonable form to the Staff to facilitate their
endeavors.

A statement will only be appropriate in the context of
the third resolution after we have reviewed the
proposed revised RAA and when and if we then seek to
provide advice to the Board.

Advisory Committees are charged with the obligation to
present "their findings and recommendations to the
board".  Our opinions as to what may be desirable are
not called for at this point.  Our first requirement
is to gather data about that which has been already
articulated by our community on this topic so that
Staff may begin their work in earnest.


--- Vittorio Bertola <vb at bertola.eu> wrote:

> All,
> 
> welcome to this working group. I have been spending
> the last couple of 
> days bugging ICANN staff to get a clearer picture of
> the timing of the 
> consultation. It looks like the process is still
> undefined, but, in any 
> case, I would recommend that we try to work out our
> statement as soon as 
> possible, before the end of the month if we can.
> 
> I don't know how familiar people are with the RAA,
> and the distinctions 
> between the RAA itself, the accreditation process
> and fees, and separate 
> policies (that are under the purview of the GNSO)
> such as the transfers 
> policy. I imagine that our observations might go
> across all these fields.
> 
> As a starting point, it might be helpful to review
> the list of open 
> issues that Twomey himself posted months ago:
> 
>
http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-21mar07.htm
> 
> We might want to keep all or some of those points as
> points on which we 
> request some progress. So I encourage you to read
> that list of questions 
> and comment.
> 
> Moreover, I think that there are some new points
> that we might want to 
> throw on the table. I, personally, would like to see
> a provision in the 
> RAA so that registrars are required to inform
> registrants of their 
> rights, through a standard text, similarly to the
> "Airline passenger's 
> charter" that you see posted in airports (at least
> in Europe). Also, 
> Wendy raised the issue of allowing registrants to
> use the RAA in 
> lawsuits with registrars - this is a strictly legal
> issue that she will 
> explain.
> 
> I have also thought about promoting the development
> of a best practice 
> document on some of the typically contested issues.
> For example, is it 
> fair that some resellers or web hosters list
> themselves as registrants, 
> rather than their customers? I don't think so;
> perhaps there could be a 
> document describing the correct roles and
> relationships among all these 
> different types of actors.
> 
> Please feel free to throw more comments in - as a
> first step, I would 
> like to identify a list of the areas that we want to
> raise, so that then 
> we can draft text for each of them.
> 
> Ciao,
> -- 
> vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a]
> bertola.eu   <--------
> -------->  finally with a new website at
> http://bertola.eu/  <--------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RAA-WG mailing list
> RAA-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/raa-wg_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> 
> RAA WG Online:
>
https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?registrant_registrar_relations
> 



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
http://sims.yahoo.com/