Re: [registrars] Pandora's Box (as it relates to transfers)

[Patrick <dnso-reg@gandi.net>]

On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 08:32:31AM -0400, Ross Wm. Rader took time to write:
> Proposal: I would like to take a proposal back to the task force that
> removes all responsibility for enforcement of the transfers policy from
> the registry contracts and place it with ICANN as part of our Registrar
> Accreditation Agreement. Further, as part of this transfer of this
> transfer of responsibility moves the burden from the registries to
> ICANN, I will be proposing that the fee cap of ~$6 be universally
> dropped by roughly 1/3 in order that the registrars have sufficient
> funds at their disposal to assist ICANN in underwriting the costs of
> their new enforcement responsibilities. This will also have the
> side-benefit of having a universal transfer policy in place regardless
> of which gTLD registry we are engaged with.

This seems to be a very good idea, as would be anything that makes
sure that contracts are indeed enforced (alongside clarifications in
contracts, like the TF is doing).

My only concern would be : what guarantees then that ICANN will
enforce contracts (more than now) ?

A scheme like one already exists for UDRP (arbitrators appointed by
ICANN, then dealing with cases), may be of interest.

As for the universal transfer policy, it may not be so easy to
achieve, since it has ties with the technical part (the protocol
used) and regarding transfers, EPP and RRP are very different.

Just some initial thoughts.

Patrick.