I absolutely love the positive approach. Instead of putting out fires or setting them ourselves we actually try to build the house. Perfect.<div><br></div><div>We obviously need to be careful in defining acts considered 'abuse of DNS'. I'm sure we will. Thanks Wendy for the positive thoughts and energy.</div>
<div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 11:37 PM, Wendy Seltzer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wendy@seltzer.com" target="_blank">wendy@seltzer.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Fadi mentioned this document<br>
<a href="https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrant-rights-responsibilities-07mar13-en.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/proposed-registrant-rights-responsibilities-07mar13-en.pdf</a><br>
in his opening, and other Board members raised it again this evening.<br>
<br>
We've characterized it as a toothless document. I suggest that we draft<br>
an alternative document, with REAL rights, including:<br>
<br>
The rights to:<br>
* persistent neutral resolution of the registered domain<br>
* no suspension or termination of registration without due process<br>
* privacy options in the provision and display of registration data<br>
* fair and non-discriminatory treatment from registrars and registries<br>
* no censorship of domain use, content, or communications through<br>
registries or registrars<br>
* right to use the registered domain for any purpose<br>
<br>
Responsibilities, including:<br>
* to be contactable, or to provide an alternative such as allowing the<br>
registrar to suspend registration on unresponded-to allegation of abuse<br>
* not to use the domain name for abuse of the DNS (to be defined more<br>
specifically: e.g., specific DNS attacks, deliberate malicious<br>
distribution of malware, or criminal activity)<br>
* not to cybersquat (already defined in UDRP)<br>
<br>
To have the most impact, it would be great if we could get a statement<br>
together during the Beijing meeting, since the Board may well be asked<br>
to vote on the RAA by late April. Please feel free to add to the above.<br>
<br>
--Wendy<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Ncuc-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org">Ncuc-discuss@lists.ncuc.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>