ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[registrars]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [registrars] Joker.com's unique transfer requirements


Nikolaj Nyholm wrote:
> 
> tim,
> 
> i couldn't agree more with you - i think i was trying to say the same thing.
> 
> the elements of implementation that are, however, unmanageble are:
>  1) hazardous (to the registrant) implementation.
>  2) registrars who do implementations based on local law rather than
> icann/registry policy.

The joker.com situation is a real problem.
It would be easy to get a local government
here (or in other places) to pass a law to the
benefit a particular registrar's business practices.

Larry Erlich

> 
> in any case, the registrant loses.
> 
> /n
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@godaddy.com]
> > Sent: 28. februar 2003 13:55
> > To: nikolajn@ascio.com
> > Cc: rconnell@psi-japan.com; Registrars@dnso.org
> > Subject: RE: [registrars] Joker.com's unique transfer requirements
> > Importance: Low
> >
> >
> > RE: Locking domains and auth info codes.
> >
> > Nikolaj,
> >
> > The primary problem with either of these practices is poor
> > implementation
> > by registrars.
> >
> > If the lock is under the control of the registrant, where is
> > the problem?
> > The Transfer TF recommendations covers this.
> >
> > The biggest problems we see with auth info codes is that either the
> > registrar hasn't implemented any reasonable way for the
> > registrant to get
> > them, or they just screwed it up in the first place by
> > assigning the same
> > code to all names. It's not the concept that's flawed. The Transfer TF
> > recommendations covers much of this also.
> >
> > Tim
> >
> >  -------- Original Message --------
> >    Subject: RE: [registrars] Joker.com's unique transfer requirements
> >    From: Nikolaj Nyholm <nikolajn@ascio.com>
> >    Date: Fri, February 28, 2003 2:22 am
> >    To: "'Robert F. Connelly'" <rconnell@psi-japan.com>,
> >          "'Registrars List'" <Registrars@dnso.org>
> >
> >    Bob, et.al,
> >
> >    I agree. The policy belongs nowhere in a competitive environment.
> >    Joker/CSL hides behind consumer protection laws in Germany, but, in
> >    our legal council's opinion, violates EU competition laws.
> >
> >    Fact is that the registrant is the loser, here, as your
> > example also
> >    demonstrates.
> >
> >
> >    Likewise, we see several CORE members practicing consumer
> > unfriendly
> >    behaviour like requiring registrants to 'open' a transfer slot by
> >    faxing in an undefined template.
> >    It strikes me that CORE (the accredited registrar) is unable to act
> >    upon this, as administration is fully delegated to members (who are
> >    not accredited).
> >
> >    Another transfer policy that I would deam anti-competitive, is the
> >    practice of placing names on REGISTRAR-LOCK, requiring
> > registrants to
> >    unlock names before initiating transfers.
> >
> >
> >    Finally, the challenges that registrants face across the line in
> >    obtaining auth info codes, is simply killing.
> >    This will become even more evident around the time of the first
> >    renewals in the fall, when registrants will want to transfer.
> >    The likely loser here will be the registries, as the
> > registrant will
> >    consider him-/herself locked down, ultimately deeming it
> > worthless to
> >    even renew.
> >
> >
> >    /n
> >
> >
> >    -----Original Message-----
> >    From: Robert F. Connelly [mailto:rconnell@psi-japan.com]
> >    Sent: 27. februar 2003 22:04
> >    To: Registrar Constituency
> >    Cc: Duane Connelly; Mieko Umezu; Naoko Orishige
> >    Subject: [registrars] Joker.com's unique transfer requirements
> >
> >
> >    Dear Colleagues:  We have documents authorizing transfer
> > of a domain
> >    from Joker.com.
> >
> >    Though not required to, after the first Nack, we submitted these
> >    documents, with the corporate seal, division seal and
> > analysts's seal
> >    to Joker.com. They refused to permit the transfer.
> >
> >    Their reason is that they do not accept *any* request for transfer
> >    unless the *registrant* first open a ten day transfer
> > window prior to
> >    the issuance of a Transfer RRP request by the gaining *registrar*.
> >
> >
> >      Did the reason for the denial fall within the allowable
> > reasons for
> >    denying a transfer under the Policy
> >
> > <http://www.icann.org/tlds/agreements/verisign/registry-agmt-appf-com-
> > 16apr0
> >    1.htm#ExhibitB> as discussed in Louis Touton's letter to
> > VGRS dated 27
> >    August 2001
> >    <http://www.icann.org/correspondence/touton-to-russo-27aug01.htm>?
> >
> >    Let's look at the provisions of Exhibit B:
> >
> >           Registrar Requirements.
> >
> >           The registration agreement between each Registrar and its
> >           Registered
> >    Name holder shall include a provision explaining that a Registered
> >    Name holder will be prohibited from changing  its
> > Registrar during the
> >    first 60 days after initial registration of the domain
> > name with the
> >    Registrar. Beginning on the 61st day after the initial registration
> >    with the Registrar, the procedures for change in
> > sponsoring registrar
> >    set forth in this policy shall apply. Enforcement  shall be the
> >    responsibility of the Registrar sponsoring the domain name
> >    registration.
> >
> >    [I don't see that the above applies to the present case.]
> >
> >           For each instance where an Registered Name holder wants to
> >           change its
> >    Registrar for an existing domain name (i.e., a domain name that
> >    appears in a particular top-level domain zone file), the gaining
> >    Registrar shall:
> >
> >               1) Obtain express authorization from an
> > individual who has
> >               the
> >    apparent authority to  legally bind the Registered Name holder (as
> >    reflected in the database of the losing        Registrar).
> >
> >    [We have that with the official, registered seal of the
> > corporation.]
> >
> >                   a) The form of the authorization is at the
> > discretion
> >                   of each
> >    gaining                Registrar.
> >
> >    [Yes, it is in the form we accept.]
> >
> >                   b) The gaining Registrar shall retain a record of
> >                   reliable
> >    evidence of the                authorization.
> >
> >    [Yes, we retain them.]
> >
> >               2) In those instances when the Registrar of
> > record is being
> >    changed simultaneously            with a transfer of a domain name
> >    from one party to another, the gaining Registrar
> >  shall also
> >    obtain appropriate authorization for the transfer. Such
> > authorization
> >    shall include, but not be limited to, one of the following:
> >
> >    [There is to be no change of registrant rights.  a, b and c do not
> >    apply.]
> >
> >                   a) A bilateral agreement between the parties.
> >
> >                   b) The final determination of a binding dispute
> >                   resolution
> >    body.
> >
> >                   c) A court order.
> >
> >               3) Request, by the transmission of a "transfer"
> > command as
> >    specified in the            Registry Registrar Protocol, that the
> >    Registry database be changed to reflect the   new Registrar.
> >
> >                   a) Transmission of a "transfer" command
> > constitutes a
> >    representation on                the part of the gaining Registrar
> >    that:
> >
> >                       (1) the requisite authorization has
> > been obtained
> >                       from
> >    the                    Registered Name holder listed in
> > the database
> >    of the losing  Registrar, and
> >
> >    [Yes, we certify that we have done all that is required prior to
> >    sending the RRP transfer request.]
> >
> >                       (2) the losing Registrar will be provided with a
> >                       copy of
> >    the                    authorization if and when requested.
> >
> >    [Though Joker.com did not request it, but we have given Joker.com a
> >    copy of the authorization.]
> >
> >           In those instances when the Registrar of record denies the
> >           requested
> >    change of Registrar,  the Registrar of record shall notify the
> >    prospective gaining Registrar that the request was  denied and the
> >    reason for the denial.
> >
> >    [The reason put forth by Joker.com is that Joker.com will
> > not accept
> >    *any* request for transfer in which the Transfer command is issued
> >    *prior_to* a communication initiated by the *registrant*, not the
> >    *registrar*.]
> >
> >           Instances when the requested change of sponsoring
> > Registrar may
> >           be
> >    denied include, but are not limited to:
> >
> >               1) Situations described in the Domain Name Dispute
> >               Resolution
> >    Policy
> >
> >               2) A pending bankruptcy of the Registered Name holder
> >
> >               3) Dispute over the identity of the Registered
> > Name holder
> >
> >               4) Request to transfer sponsorship occurs
> > within the first
> >               60
> >    days after the initial registration with the Registrar
> >
> >    [None of the above four cases apply to these cases.]
> >
> >           In all cases, the losing Registrar shall respond to
> > the e-mail
> >           notice
> >    regarding the "transfer"request within five (5) days. Failure to
> >    respond will result in a default "approval" of the "transfer."
> >
> >    [Joker.com always sends a nack within 24 hours of the request for
> >    transfer.]
> >
> >    end quote and comments on Exhibit B:
> >
> >    Now, let's look at the procedure that Joker.com demands.  These
> >    demands are on the *registrant*, not the *registrar*:
> >
> >                                          How to Change from
> > joker.com to
> >    another Registrar
> >
> >                                       Please go to Servicezone to
> >                                       transfer
> >    domains from joker to another registrar.
> >                                       New procedure for transfers of
> >                                       domains
> >    from joker.com to another ICANN accredited registrar
> >
> >                                       Law in Germany is oriented to
> >                                       protect the
> >    consumer. Joker.com is obligated to ask the owner and/or
> > the admin-c
> >    for explicit agreement in the case a domain should be
> > transferred from
> >    joker.com to another ICANN accredited registrar. Starting
> > 24.04.2002
> >    joker.com introduced a new process for those requests:
> >
> >    [There is no argument about the applicability of German law.  They
> >    could satisfy German law by sending an Email to the registrant or
> >    admin contact after receiving the request for transfer from NSI.
> >    While we would be annoyed if they sent a complex message to our
> >    Japanese customers and then nacked the request because
> > they did *not*
> >    receive an affirmative reply, such is not the case.  The nack is
> >    issued if the registrant has not gone to "servicezone"
> > (what ever that
> >    may be) and opened a ten day window.]
> >
> >                                           Step 1: Opening a
> > time slot of
> >                                           10
> >    calender days for transfers of domains at joker.com
> >                                               1a. Joker.com will only
> >                                               accept
> >    transfer-request from other registrars if advised before
> > such request
> >    arrives at joker.com .
> >
> >    [Emphasis added by BobC]
> >                                               1b. Advising
> > joker.com can
> >                                               be
> >    done by the owner or admin-c or billing-c of the domain by
> > opening a
> >    time slot for transfer of the domain. Please go to
> >    Servicezone to initiate the opening.
> >                                               1c. As soon as joker.com
> >                                               gets the
> >    demand to open the time slot the owner and the admin-c are
> > notified by
> >    email.
> >                                               1d. If none of them
> >                                               objects, but
> >    at least one of them agrees explicitly within  5 calendar days, an
> >    additional time slot of 10 calender days is opened
> >    during which joker.com accepts transfer-request from other
> > registrars.
> >
> >                                               1e. The owner and the
> >                                               admin-c
> >    will be notified of the result of that first step, i.e.
> > after 5 days.
> >    If. If the time slot was opened, the owner and admin-c will be
> >    informed at the end of the time slot if no transfer-request was
> >    received by joker.com .
> >                                               1g. If the TLD
> > is .info or
> >                                               .biz
> >    you need a so called auth-id from joker.com.  That auth-id must be
> >    submitted to the registry by the new registrar. If the 10
> >    days time slot is opened you will be able to get the
> > auth-id by using
> >    the status request of transfer at the servicezone.
> >
> >    [The above section does not apply to .com.]
> >
> >                                               1h. During the
> > whole time
> >                                               (5+10
> >    days), but only if the domains is not already transferred,
> > the owner
> >    and/or admin-c has the possibility to reject
> >    the transfer.
> >                                           Step 2: Initiating the
> >    transfer-request at another registrar
> >                                               2a. In addition
> > and after
> >                                               getting
> >    the notification from joker.com that the time  slot of 10 days is
> >    open, the new registrar has to initiate the transfer-request
> >    at the registry.
> >                                      2c. Owner and admin-c will be
> >                                      notified of
> >    the result.
> >                                               2d. Transfer-request
> >                                               arriving
> >    outside the time slot will be refused.
> >    [Too arbitrary.]
> >
> >                                               2e. Transfer-request
> >                                               arriving
> >    when a domain is expired will be refused. Be aware that
> > the registry
> >    for com - net - org has a process of auto-renew, i.e. the domain is
> >    temporarily prolonged at the cost of joker.com even if it
> > was not paid
> >    by the customer. That domain is considered as expired and will be
> >    deleted if the customer does not pay.
> >
> >    [The above does not apply to these cases, though these
> > delays *could*
> >    cause the registrant to miss its chance to transfer.]
> >
> >
> >                                       Example:
> >
> >                                       Day
> >                                       01 Demanding the opening of the
> >                                       time slot
> >    from owner/admin-c/billing-c
> >                                       02 email from joker.com to owner
> >                                       and
> >    admin-c asking for agreement
> >                                       03
> >                                       04
> >                                       05
> >                                       06 email from joker.com
> > announcing
> >                                       the
> >    result of the 1. step, start of time slot
> >                                       07
> >                                       08
> >                                       09
> >                                       10 possibly email to owner and
> >                                       admin-c
> >    announcing that transfer is enabled because a
> > transfer-request arrived
> >    at joker.com.
> >                                       ....
> >                                       16 if no
> > transfer-request arrived
> >                                       at
> >    joker.com, email to owner and admin-c stating that time slot is now
> >    closed without transfer enabled.
> >
> >    end quote and comments:
> >
> >    I see no relationship between the procedures set forth in Exhibit B
> >    and the process demanded by Joker.com.  The are simply making it
> >    extremely difficult for any registrant to transfer its domain to
> >    another ICANN accredited registrar.
> >
> >    The *portability* of domains is denied if Joker.com is the
> > registrar
> >    of record.
> >
> >    My posting on the Registrar Constituency mailing list brought forth
> >    comments from other exasperated registrars who have been stymied by
> >    the Joker.com system.
> >
> >    Remember, we are talking about registrants in Japan where
> > English is
> >    not their primary language.  In fact, they may not be sufficiently
> >    capable of handling such complex requirements in English.
> >
> >    Add to it the fact that English is not the mother tongue of whoever
> >    translated the Germany description of the Joker.com rules into
> >    English.  I have difficulty being sure I understand what they are
> >    requiring.  For example, the first and second ten day
> > "windows" add up
> >    to fifteen days;-(
> >
> >    I have not considered any further implications of Louis' letter.  I
> >    think it is adequate to consider Exhibit B.
> >
> >    I suspect that Joker.com will ignore the TF report.
> >
> >    Regards, BobC
> >
> >
> >


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>