URS Recommendation #4 The Working Group recommends that the ICANN org establishes a compliance mechanism to ensure that URS Providers, Registries, and Registrars operate in accordance with the URS rules and requirements and fulfill their role and obligations in the URS process. The Working Group recommends that such compliance mechanism should include an avenue for any party in the URS process to file complaints and seek resolution of noncompliance issues. As an implementation guidance, the Working Group recommends that the Implementation Review Team considers:
Note: This recommendation is related to URS Question #1. | URS Question #1 1a. What compliance issues have Registries and Registrars discovered in URS processes, if any? 1b. Do you have suggestions for how to enhance compliance of URS Providers, Registries, and Registrars in the URS process? |
Context:
The Working Group discovered non-compliance issues with URS Providers, Registries, and Registrars.
There are cases where certain URS Provider did not: 1) translate the Notice of Complaint into the predominant language used in the registrant’s country or territory per URS Procedure para 4.2[1] and URS Rules 9(e)[2]; 2) transmit the Notice of Complaint via fax and postal mail per URS Procedure para 4.3[3]; and 3) list and maintain the backgrounds of all of their examiners as required by URS Rule 6(a)[4].
Some Registries delayed in fulfilling or did not fulfill their obligations relating to locking, unlocking, and suspension of disputed domains; some URS Provider reported their non-compliance to ICANN.
URS Providers and Practitioners reported difficulty in getting the Registrar on the same page with the Registry to implement a settlement[5], which typically involves a transfer of the domain registration at the Registrar level. Problems with Chinese Registrar to implement the Determination have also been reported.
The Working Group agreed that the ICANN org should proactively or reactively monitor the practices of URS Providers, Registries, and Registrars in the URS process, and establish a compliance mechanism for any stakeholder in the URS process to raise complaints. The Working Group is unsure which specific mechanism would be appropriate, so it recommends the future IRT to investigate different options, including the existing mechanism in the ICANN org (e.g., ICANN Compliance department).
The Working Group also seeks public comment on additional compliance issues, as well as suggestions for enhancing compliance in the URS process (see URS Question #1).
[1] URS Procedure para 4.2: Within 24 hours after receiving Notice of Lock from the Registry Operator, the URS Provider shall notify the Registrant of the Complaint (“Notice of Complaint”), sending a hard copy of the Notice of Complaint to the addresses listed in the Whois contact information, and providing an electronic copy of the Complaint, advising of the locked status, as well as the potential effects if the Registrant fails to respond and defend against the Complaint. Notices must be clear and understandable to Registrants located globally. The Notice of Complaint shall be in English and translated by the Provider into the predominant language used in the Registrant’s country or territory.
[2] URS Rule 9(e): The URS Procedure Paragraph 4.2 specifies the languages in which the Notice of Complaint shall be transmitted...The Provider is not responsible for translating any documents other than the Notice of Complaint.
[3] URS Procedure para 3.3: Given the rapid nature of this Procedure, and the intended low level of required fees, there will be no opportunity to correct inadequacies in the filing requirements.
[4] URS Rule 6(a): Each Provider shall maintain and publish a publicly available list of Examiners and their qualifications.
[5] URS Rules 16(a) stipulates that if, before the Examiner’s Determination, the Parties agree on a settlement, the Examiner shall terminate the URS proceeding