Re: [ga] Re: ICANN & transfers

["vinton g. cerf" <vinton.g.cerf@wcom.com>]

At 08:17 PM 7/30/2002 -0500, Don Brown wrote:
>IANAL either, but it stands to reason that ICANN can enforce its
>contract with the Registry.
>
>Therefore, if ICANN's contract with the Registry includes the
>procedure to be used for transfers between Registrars, then ICANN can
>enforce that issue with the Registry.  The problem of enforcement is,
>therefore, the Registry's problem and they can be in breach with ICANN
>if the do not ensure specific performance.

the information I have seems to show that these specifics are in the
contract between registrars and registry at least for the particular
case of .com/.net/.org so ICANN does not have 3rd party standing to
intervene for that case. The newer gTLD contracts are a bit more
refined.

>The next question, though, is what happens if the Registry is in
>breach? What is the downside for the Registry? What is it that keeps
>them honest? (Err - sorry. Bad choice of words.) -- What contractual
>penalty gets the Registry's attention?
>
>I haven't read the contracts and have no desire to do so. It seems to
>me, though, that the relationships are convoluted. ICANN accredits
>Registrars and should have a one-to-one relationship WRT their
>behavior in respect to that Accreditation. The procedures
>should be a part of that Accreditation instrument, and IOW, the
>Registry Agreement should not be involved or the least relevant. How
>much were the lawyers paid to paint you into a corner (if that is,
>indeed, the case)?

It looks so me as if we need something more refined than dis-
accreditation as the principal tool providing incentive to adhere
to contract terms. 

v

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html