Re: [ga] FW: Comment from the gTLD Registry Constituency

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

Jeff,

The First Interim Implementation Report made the following comment:

"In our view, the Ombudsman should be a person to whom those who believe they 
have been treated unfairly in the context of ICANN processes can turn to for 
an independent evaluation and, potentially, facilitation of a resolution if 
the complaint is determined to be well founded. In sum, the Ombudsman as we 
envision it is an input mechanism for complaints, an independent voice in 
evaluating and resolving those complaints, and a potential source of 
suggestions on how to improve ICANN procedures and processes to reduce 
complaints."

ICANN has already produced a concrete proposal that attends to the resolution 
of disputes through the use of the Ombudsman function which is fully 
supported financially by ICANN.  What's so wrong with using their solution as 
the basis by which a registrant's transfers grievance is resolved?  Put the 
policy language into the RAA and ICANN is thereby required to provide an 
enforcement function.  Couple it with Ombudsman services and you have solved 
the problem with no expense to either the registries or registrars or 
registrants.  
--
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