Hi all – forwarding FYI

Joy

From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Marika Konings
Sent: Friday, 4 May 2012 8:59 a.m.
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [gnso-lockpdp-wg] Action items from today's meeting

Dear All,

Please find below the action items from today's UDRP Domain Name Lock WG meeting. Attached you'll find the mind map in which I've attempted to capture some of the notes of today's meeting. If there is anything missing, please let me know.

With best regards,

Marika

Action Items

• WG Leadership: Michele Neylon was nominated to serve as the Working Group Chair. Alan Greenberg was nominated to serve as the Working Group Vice-Chair. If there are any other candidates, or support for / objections to these candidates, please share those with the mailing list prior to the next meeting. If there are no other candidates or objections, the GNSO Council will be requested to confirm these appointments.
• Best Practices Paper: Sharing of latest published draft of draft advisory concerning registrar best practices to protect registrants upon initiation of a UDRP complaint – Please find attached the paper that was the basis for the discussion at the Sydney meeting (see http://syd.icann.org/node/4051). As mentioned on the call, the paper is broader than just locking. The sections that address locking (directly or indirectly) appear to be the following: 
• Upon notification of a domain name dispute filed through an ICANN Approved Dispute-Resolution Service Provider (“Provider”), the registrar should immediately place the domain name on registrar lock to prevent cancellation, transfer or changes to the domain name and notify all parties.  In arbitration cases, the registrar should subsequently receive a verification request from the Provider".
• A UDRP proceeding commences when the Provider has notified the Complainant, the Respondent and the concerned Registrar(s), of the commencement of the response period.  During this time, the registrar should not take any action involving transfer or cancellation of the domain name until receiving direction from the dispute resolution provider of a decision or other resolution of the complaint, which could be a withdrawal among other things.
• If the Provider notifies the registrar of such a suspension and/or transfer, then the registrar may transfer the domain name to the Complainant on the respondent’s behalf but must prevent any further transfer of the domain name pending the termination or withdrawal of the proceeding.During this period, it is not advisable to allow the registrant access to a mechanism that would allow transfer or cancellation of the domain name. In addition, the registrar should only accept notification of suspension directly from the Provider. 
• If the registrar receives notice of a termination or withdrawal from the Provider, the registrar should immediately restore control of the domain name to the agreed upon registrant as stated by the Provider and notify the Complainant, Respondent and Provider. The registrar should only accept terminations/withdrawals directly from the Provider.
• Also, upon receiving a communication from a Provider about a UDRP complaint, registrars should carefully review all registrant requests to transfer domain names subject to the complaint to a different registrant, as such transfers may be restricted by paragraph 8 of the UDRP   
• Outreach: Develop questions to obtain input from registrars / registries – Matt Schneller has volunteered to develop a first list of questions 
• Outreach: Review proposed public comment forum draft (All)