RE: [registrars] Transfers Task Force Update

["David Wascher" <dwascher@iaregistry.com>]

I would also like to see a clarification from an "apparent Authority"
standpoint.

In our situation one telco will buy out another. No one ever thinks about
the domain name contacts because of the amount of conversion on changing one
company to another - less then 30 days for about 1500 to 6000
(telco)customer base. At first everyone's existing email will be an alias
address to the new address. Within the next 2 to 3 months everyone's email
will be shifted to the new email address and the old email address will be
gone. After this time the telco will move domains over to the registrar that
they do business with.

So here is my problem:
1. We will get a request from the New admin to transfer the name which is
from the new telco not the old. The New Admin will want to change the admin
information during the transfer process(Admin convenience - kill 2 birds
with one stone).
2. Old address of Admin and Registrant no longer works or exists because of
the buy out. Losing registrar can not check old email address for Admin or
Registrant.

The new Admin is normally an existing customer of ours which has "Apparent
Authority" as the admin.

Thanks,
David W.
IARegistry

**-----Original Message-----
**From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
**Behalf Of Bhavin Turakhia
**Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 9:00 PM
**To: RegistrarsDnso Org
**Subject: RE: [registrars] Transfers Task Force Update
**
**
**sorry for delayed response..... still recovering from indefinite
**jetlag ...
**:)
**
**> 1. Apparent Authority.
**
**I had already supplied my feedback on it. I believe Elaina had also
**commented on my mail.
**
******************* MY MAIL *****************
**<snip>
**if gaining registrars define what they think apparent authority is then
**losing registrars will feel uncomfortable and vice versa.
**
**instead if we all agree that ONLY admin contacts and registrants
**are binding
**authority (an example) and if icann mandates an authorisation from any of
**these two, then autmatically a comfort level is achieved by all.
**additionally it helps spread a unified message to all customers that the
**admin contact and registrant have apparent authority to transfer a domain
**and therefore they should be careful with what they put in those fields.
**
**We cannot afford to have apparent authority defined vaguely since this not
**only would cause discomfort amongst all registrars and break the
**concept of
**this document, but additionally confuse customers who would while
**trefrring
**domains to one registrar would have the admin contact approve it while in
**case of another would require all the contacts to approve or some such
**thing.
**
**If on the other hand we have a closed apparent authority definition which
**all registrars are amenable to then it would resolve this issue.
******************* MY MAIL *****************
**
**************** ELAINA's Comments ****************
**I think that Bhavin makes a very good point about defining a list of
**apparent authority personnel.  The current ICANN and registry
**contracts and
**concensus policies DO NOT define "apparent authority" - that's the whole
**problem.
**
**We can limit it to registrant and administrative contact, and still allow
**for indirect apparent authority per Louis' clairification, as described by
**Mike: "If there was a contractual provision in the ISP subscription
**agreement
**appointing the ISP as an agent/attorney-in-fact for registrar sponsorship,
**this would be acceptable as apparent authority. Simple
**contractual language
**absent this agent/attorney-in-fact language would not be sufficient to
**convey apparent authority to an ISP. Notwithstanding, the gaining
**registrar
**would still have to provide existence of this documentation to the losing
**registrar if requested."
**
**Mike - since your resolution states that the transfers document can be
**amended at any time, why don't we propose this as an amendment to the
**document for a separate vote?
**************** ELAINA's Comments ****************
**
**
**