RE: [registrars] Fw: WHOIS & Transfers reports

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@godaddy.com>]

Bruce,

I don't necessarily argue with your conclusions, but I will with your
analogy.

This is not like switching office supply companies. I would liken it more to
mini-storage (we have a lot of that here in the US at least). If I have my
car in storage in Iowa and then move to Arizona and ask a mini-storage
facility there to get my car transferred, I would hope that the Iowa
facility would require some pretty significant proof before letting my car
go.

Now I know that domain names are not considered property by most, and I'm
not trying to argue that. But given the potential loss of the domain name,
associated website, and revenue in some cases, it is not a typical supplier
situation as you suggest.

What the losing registrar is being asked to do is to trust that a competitor
has done their job without any real indemnification from liability later if
the transfer was improper. The dispute resolution mechanisms do not preclude
our customers from filing suit against us, and win or lose, it is expensive.
Given the current process, or the proposed new process, it is not practical
to ask in every case for a copy of the authorization that the gaining
registrar received. As a result, you have a number of rightly concerned
registrars who try to verify with their customer before letting go.

As everyone no doubt knows, Go Daddy would prefer a process that starts with
the losing registrar. There is absolutely no reason why that would not work
as well, if not better, than the proposed process. In either case,
enforcement and dispute resolution is the key. To rely on so called
"incentives" on either registrar's part is ludicrous.

That all said, we have supported the proposed process as acceptable. There
really are no significant differences from the current process. It doesn't
really change anything, but it is workable.

Siegfried, I think if you read the proposal closely you will find that you
can make it work to your satisfaction. Of course, that's counting on it
getting implemented as written.

Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-registrars@dnso.org [mailto:owner-registrars@dnso.org]On
Behalf Of Bruce Tonkin
Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 2:31 AM
To: Siegfried Langenbach; Registrars
Subject: RE: [registrars] Fw: WHOIS & Transfers reports


Hello Siegfried,

You may be confused about the overall process.

>
> It is not the first time in that very issue that I rise my
> objections to the
> suggested transfer procedure.
>
> For the sake of shortness I will concentrate on one item only:
>
> 25. Instances when the Losing Registrar may not deny a
> transfer include, but are not limited to;
>
> *   No response from the Registrant or Administrative
>     contact ...
>
> I do repeat : no response can, according to german law ( and I
> would be surprised if in other european countries that is different),
> NOT be considered as agreement.

Recommendation 25 has no relation to getting agreement for a transfer - you
have taken it out of context.  It is part of an audit process.  You need to
refer to recommendation 25 in the context of recommendation 11: "If the
Losing Registrar chooses to independently confirm.."


The actual task force report REQUIRES explicit consent from the registrant
before a transfer can be completed.

For example, see recommendation 8:
The gaining registrar MUST confirm a transfer request, by requiring that the
Registrant or Administrative contact of record as listed in the WHOIS
complete a valid Standardised Form of Authorisation.  A transfer MUST NOT be
allowed to proceed if no confirmation is received.




>
> It just as simple : introducing that will have the effect that some
> registrars will act agains the law or not follow that procedure:
> not really a good result.
> Not dealing with that fact is not going to help anybody.
>

There are no laws being broken here as the registrant MUST give explicit
agreement to a transfer.

As a losing registrar you have the right to audit the process (using the
same Standardised Form of Authorisation), and if a gaining registrar has not
complied with the policy you have the right to take action via dispute
resolution - and of course you have the right to take legal action using
German law against an organisation that has transferred a domain name
without the consent of the registrant.

Recommendation 25 is actually consistent with the law as you have described
it.  As the registrant has given agreement under recommendation 8 to the
transfer, you may NOT deny the transfer WITHOUT the agreement of the
registrant.  By denying a transfer against the wishes of the registrant that
has not given you permission to deny the transfer, then instead you would be
in violation of the law.

I am not a lawyer, but I would be surprised if there is a law that requires
a person to contact their previous supplier of a service, simply becuase
they have chosen to transfer their business to another supplier.  I would
expect the previous supplier to be able to check if this was the customer
intent, and if so, find out why they chose another supplier.

Regards,
Bruce