Transfers Task Force Briefing ICANN Domain Names Council Meeting March 12, 2002

1. Transfers Task Force Briefing ICANN Domain Names Council Meeting March 12, 2002 Registry Registrar A Registrar B

2. Terms of Reference for Task Force on Transfers The purpose of the Task Force on Transfers is to: 1. Develop understanding across the NC of the issues and existing policies governing the transfers of domain names between [accredited ICANN] registrars; 2. Ensure broader understanding of the procedures for domain name transfers proposed in the Registrars’ procedural document, which has been voted on by the Registrars; 3. Identify any issues not yet fully addressed by the Registrar’s document and develop appropriate task force processes to ensure that these outstanding areas are addressed in a timely manner that reflects the input of all affected stakeholders; 4. Develop effective mechanism to take input from registrants (across all sectors-individuals, non commercial, government, corporate, other) for initial validation of concerns regarding impact of transfers on registrants; ensure documentation of such outreach; including requesting substantive submissions from those who may be affected; 5. Identify relevant policy issues raised by transferring domain names between registrars in a shared registry environment; 6. Based on above work efforts, including documented outreach and agreement/disagreement among affected parties, develop recommendations to the Names Council for guidance to the ICANN Board of Directors concerning any amendment of existing contractual agreements, where such changes are needed to correct any identified clauses which require policy guidance or clarification , should the Names Council determine that consensus support for said recommendations exists, as specified in section 2.d of the ICANN bylaws. Item 7 is being modified by the Task Force for a more reasonable delivery time frame. Our target remains May,2002 for a final Report. 7. Proceed with work program to accomplish above; publish an interim report on activities in January and a more thorough report containing implementable recommendations in Ghana to the Names Council for vote on any proposed policy recommendations.

3. Marilyn Cade, BC-chair Grant Forsyth, BC Sloan Gaon,Reg’y Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales, Non-Comm Mark McFadden, ISPCP Milton Mueller, Non-Comm Elisabeth Porteneuve, ccTLD Ross Rader, Registrar Christine Russo, Registry David Safran, IPC Rick Shera, ccTLD Dan Steinberg, GA Nick Wood, IPC ICANN Names Council Transfers Task Force

4. Work of the Task Force • Transfer issues began to surface in March, 2001, in the transfer of domain names between registrars, resulting in delays and/or denials and some user confusion. • The constituency began to try to identify possible solutions and address these within the Registrar Constituency. • At Montevideo ICANN meeting other constituencies noted they were affected by “transfers” and with full support of all constituencies, the NC created Task Force. • Registrar Constituency “Inter-Registrar Domain Name Transfers: Principles and Processes for Gaining and Losing Registrars as basis for interpreting Exhibit B.” Process is not yet implemented across all accredited Registrars.

5. Cont’d • Key issue: agreed to “definition” of apparent authority, such that Registrars and Registrants and intermediaries who act for them, have understanding of what is needed to establish same – consultation with ICANN Staff; • TF needs to document and take input on draft guidance, taking into account contractual agreements, role of third parties, and registrants. • The TF has also examined the role of “auth-info” as a part of a solution and will be publishing a statement which defines the role of auth-info within this process. • Staff Discussion Paper: Redemption Grace Periods for Deleted Names – may be discussed by TF. Still to be determined.

6. Validating Understanding of the Registrant Experience with Transfers • Participants themselves bring expertise; Staff has some data from complaints; build on that to validate range of experiences [good and bad] • Registrant survey to gather more illustrations and examples • Fast Track – Questionnaire posted; intended to be a targeted outreach in first round; Task Force to review all responses as a group to develop better understanding of experiences – to guide recommendations. • Survey will go to selective group of ISPs who act as registrars; corporate/MIS registrar intermediaries; and registrants themselves. Methodology still under development for distribution. • Quantity is not our goal, but illustrations.

7. Timeline for Bringing it all Together for Report to NC October 29, 2001 Transfers Task Force Announced November/December 2001 Appointment of task force members Development and finalization of Terms of Reference Jan/March 2002 Apparent authority discussion/Development of draft survey March 2002 – GHANA Update on work. Finalize Survey; outreach. Publish draft of “apparent authority”. April 2002 Conclude outreach Analyze as team in TF; Conclude preliminary findings of survey May /June 2002 Publish draft report for public comments/ Publish final version by June meeting