Reply Comments In Support of Real
Registrant Rights
and
In Opposition to RAA’s Proposed
3.7.7.2 Which Will
Lead to
Real Harm and Injustice for
Registrants
I. Real Registrant Rights and
Responsibilities
I support
the comments
submitted by Robin Gross, Chair of the Non-Commercial
Stakeholders Group and
the “Real Registrant Rights and Responsibilities” document she
attached. I was
pleased to find a draft of registrant
rights and responsibilities, and the idea is a positive step
forward – however,
it was drafted without the input of Registrant groups within
ICANN.
As public
comment is the
opportunity for public input, I hereby submit my support for
the “Real
Registrant Rights and Responsibility” document submitted by
Robin Gross on
behalf of NCSG on May 14th. This document is the
result of a robust
conversation on the NCSG list, and at our meeting in
II.
RAA’s
proposed 3.7.7.2 Will Lead to Real Harm and Injustice for
Registrants
On a separate and personal note, I
raise my deep
concern and strong objection to the proposed change in RAA 3.7.7.2 that would allow a domain
name to become
null, void and subject to “suspension and/or cancellation” within 7 days
of any change to
the domain name information – any change!
The
2009 RAA
requirement was reasonable and required Registrants to
“promptly” update their
information after a change. This
proposed
change to the RAA came out of nowhere, was never discussed
with the Registrant
Communities of ICANN, and will lead to the most unfair of
results for Registrants.
The
proposed 3.7.7.2 allows
Domain Name Cancellation with or without any actual harm
or problem with the
domain name. Simply
because a
Registrant has not updated her information after moving a home
or business – and
regardless of the accuracy of other contact information
including email and/or
phone – the Registrar will have the option to
suspend or even cancel
the Domain Name Registration (!)
The
result is blatantly
unfair and it is baffling why ICANN would want this as a goal.
For example, if a
parent has registered domain names for local charities,
sports, political
groups and neighborhood functions, and then relocates to new
physical address and
does not think to update her physical address (while she/he is
registering
children for school, seeking out the local grocery stories,
and finding
pediatricians), then within a mere seven days, all of her/his
domain names are now
subject to suspension or cancellation under this proposed
new section of the
RAA(!).
This
“suspension
and/or cancellation” may take place, subject to the discretion
of the
Registrar, but allowed under the Proposed 3.7.7.2:
-
regardless of ANY notice to the Registrant (or the
complete lack
thereof);
-
regardless of ANY OTHER ACCURATE INFORMATION in the
Whois database,
e.g., phone and/or email address of the Registrant;
-
regardless of any harm OR LACK THEREOF in the
registration of the
domain name.
This
makes no sense as
a rule or principle of ICANN, and will lead to the most
ungracious of acts. It
will allow small businesses to spy on each other and report to
Registrars of
recent changes of location and the need to revoke domain names
– all in an
effort to steal valued domain names of their business or
industry; it will
enable Registrars to spy on their own customers and
cherry-pick domain names
from their Registrants’ accounts based on the mere change of
minor information
only eight days earlier.
Further, Proposed 3.7.7.2 violates the standard
set by the
Whois Review Team which called for, not absolute accuracy of all
Whois
information, but the contactability of the Registrant. (See Recommendation 11 of
the Data Accuracy
Section which advises ICANN to “take appropriate measures to
reduce the number
of WHOIS registrations that fall into the accuracy groups
Substantial Failure
and Full Failure (as defined by the NORC Data Accuracy Study,
2009/10)…” -- terms
referring to the complete and nearly
complete inability to reach a registrant at any of
his/her/its
contact information).
This
proposed change to
the RAA is in no way tied to any requirement of the security
and stability of
the Internet. It is in
no way tied to
any other standard for consumer information updates and
corrections. For
example, I have ability (and notice) to update my personal information on
credit cards, social
networks, bank accounts, etc., and often it is the notice from
an institution of
an error in the data that notifies me (and all consumers) of
the need for an update
or correction.
Where,
as here, there
is no notice to the Registrant, and nothing to put him/her/it
on notice of a
violation, this proposed change will lead to real problems,
significant harm
and a sense of deep injustice by Registrants against ICANN. Thank you for correcting
this proposal – and
setting it back to a “prompt” correction of data (with
adequate notice to the
Registrant). Alternatively,
this
proposal must be tied, in its final version, to some type of
clear and present
harm and violation of the domain name registration, plus its
inaccurate
information, with due process for the suspension or
cancellation.
Please
contact me if you
would like to discuss the problems with this provision
further. Thank you for
making the small and reasonable change requested in the final
2013 RAA.