RE: Re[2]: [ga] ORG: some answers from ICANN

["Roberto Gaetano" <ga_chair@hotmail.com>]

Marylin,
>
>One item where I disagree with your interpretation, but I can be wrong..
>
>I don't recall that ICANN was ever in a position to say that every 
>registrar
>would be free to have their own dispute resolution policies, based on the
>input received in the White Paper process.  I didn't go back and research
>it, but if my memory is right,  I believe it was a big issue from the
>beginning that there be standard ICANN policies, which all accredited
>registrars would adhere to, to prevent forum shopping. Selecting different
>resources to implement the standard policies agreed to by ICANN for
>accredited registrars is indeed a different thing.

Off my memory, when the applications for the new TLDs were collected, one of 
the information the applicant Registries had to provide was their dispute 
resolution policy.
This, IMHO, hinted the possibility of having different mechanisms for 
different registries: otherwise, ICANN should have stated since the 
beginning that everybody had to adopt UDRP.
Even in the discussion about the individual applications, the point never 
came up (incidentally, unlike the failure to separate Registry and 
Registrar, that was criticized for IOD's .web).

I still think that it will be a *good thing* to have different policies for 
different TLDs. In a multicultural, complex world the "one size fits all" is 
indeed often a simple solution, but seldom the best one.

Regards
Roberto


_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

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