Public Comment is a vital part of our multistakeholder model. It provides a mechanism for stakeholders to have their opinions and recommendations formally and publicly documented. It is an opportunity for the ICANN community to effect change and improve policies and operations.
Submissions for this Proceeding
Proposed Updates to Existing Rights Protection Mechanisms Documentation
View this Proceeding
My Submissions
Search Public Comment Submissions For This Proceeding
To search for keywords within Public Comment submissions documents or pages, type in the keyword and press Enter after each selection.
Submission Summary:
We thank the IRT for its current work, but note that there is more to do.
Implementation must not go beyond the limits set by the Working Group, much less innovate
in relation to what was previously decided, and Implementation Guidance, when provided
with great care and detail, should be followed. To these ends, NCSG recommends a number of amendments and clarifications, outlined in the full comments text.
Submission Summary:
First and last names are registered symbolic names
How can I change?
Submission Summary:
The IPC appreciates the efforts of the Rights Protection Mechanisms (RPMs) Phase 1 Policy Development Process (PDP) Implementation Review Team (IRT) to implement the PDP recommendations. In general, the IPC agrees with and supports the IRT’s report and associated implementation plan. That said, we provide limited comments identifying some areas where we believe further refinement may be appropriate, see attachment.
Submission Summary:
(see attached document)
Submission Summary:
The Business Constituency (BC) recognizes that the Working Group has already expended considerable effort in reaching its Policy Recommendations, so the current exercise involves ensuring that the Implementation Proposals match the Policy Recommendations.
In each instance, the BC agrees that the proposed documentation is consistent with and supports the Policy Proposals.
Submission Summary:
I support the current proposed changes but feel that one item should be added for consideration to account for the situation where URS parties are able to negotiate the transfer of a disputed domain name after the conclusion of a URS case:
URS par. 10.2 should be revised to "...the domain name will not be able to be transferred, deleted or modified for the life of the registration unless both Complainant and Respondent mutuall...