[ga] Why no sanctions?

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

Having read the Advisory Concerning VeriSign Global Registry Services' 
".com/.net Promotion" cited at 
http://www.icann.org/announcements/advisory-12dec01.htm I have the following 
question:

Why did ICANN choose to issue an Advisory rather than a Finding of Violation 
of Appendix I (Registry Code of Conduct) under the Sanctions program 
(appendix Y)?  

The advisory states:  "VGRS did not provide the required prior notice to 
ICANN of changes in its registry prices that is required by the .com and .net 
Registry Agreements, nor did it give notice and seek approval for the 
additional terms under which registrations are provided through the program."

It goes on to state:  "after consultation with ICANN, VGRS has agreed to 
modify its program to establish a calculation mechanism that incorporates a 
fixed participation fee and a placement fee based on a series of seven 
different performance levels, ranging from a 5% increase to a 120% increase 
over the baseline performance."

Are we now negotiating and arriving at compromises with those that willfully 
violate the rules instead of laying down the law and imposing sanctions?  
Perhaps Staff could comment on why "ICANN believes that this accommodation is 
the best outcome in the current circumstances."  Will this become Standard 
Operating Procedure?  If so, every registry will feel comfortable breaking 
any rules knowing that they then will have the opportunity to negotiate 
should they ever get caught.


--
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