[ga] Transfers: Apparent Authority Discussion

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

The Chair of the Transfers TF has posted this reminder:  "On 5/14, a draft 
related to Apparent Authority was posted to the TF list. Comments FROM the TF 
itself will close on June 1.   The constituencies and GA are encouraged to 
widely distribute this draft and to provide comment via email to the TF 
members."

The "Apparent Authority" Analysis provided by Ross Rader and his "small 
drafting team" may be found at:  
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-transfer/Arc00/msg00181.html

My comments:

Ross's admittedly incomplete analysis focuses on two terms:  apparent 
authority and express authorization, the former term having been given a 
great deal of thought, and the latter term awaiting further consideration.  
These terms rise to a level of significance owing to their use in Exhibit B 
of the Registry/Registrar agreements which specify that "...for each instance 
where an Registered Name holder wants to change its Registrar for an existing 
domain name, the gaining Registrar shall obtain express authorization from an 
individual who has the apparent authority to legally bind the Registered Name 
holder."    

Ross argues that "It would be unworkable for this level of authorization to 
have to be obtained from the Registrant directly in every instance."  This 
argument is readily refuted (as "workable" models already exist in 
Australia).  What seems to be of greater importance to Ross and his 
associates is the "convenience" of the Registrar which is enhanced by the 
unexplained need to abide by the text of Exhibit B rather than crafting more 
appropriate language...  

By way of example, consider the auDA Registrar-Registar Transfers document 
posted to the TF list by Rick Shera:   
http://www.auda.org.au/docs/auda-transfers-draft.pdf    Rick notes that they 
have avoided apparent authority arguments altogether by specifying the level 
of authority required from the registrant, and that express "written" 
authorization is clearly defined (and does not include email).   Written 
authorization is defined as:

a hard copy letter, facsimile or PDF document signed by the registrant, or in 
the case of a corporate registrant, signed by a senior manager, corporate 
director, company secretary (or the equivalent of these positions) of the 
registrant.

The auDa procedure calls for written authorization coupled with a valid 
domain name PIN from the registrant (note that automated transfers are 
explicitedly prohibited for the sake of registrant protection).  I would 
appreciate some discussion on why this Australian model cannot be used by the 
ICANN organization, and why the Transfers TF has so far failed to discuss 
this alternative.









--
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