URS Individual Proposal #33

Context: 

Rationale provided by the Proponent: The current legal relationships between ICANN and the URS Providers create uncertainty regarding accountability, transparency, and compliance. Formal contracts, for a fixed term, without presumptive renewal clauses, will help improve the current state of affairs. Contracts will provide all parties with clear expectations of rights and responsibilities. 

URS Providers should be subject to the same scrutiny as other contracted parties such as Registrars and Registry Operators, to ensure that bad actors do not gain control over an ADR Provider. All beneficial owners of 15% or more (directly or indirectly) of a Provider should be disclosed. 

The current “accredit and forget it” model is unacceptable. These are multi-million dollar ADR services annually in aggregate and should be formalized with contracts.

Working Group Deliberation: There was some support in the Working Group for publishing this proposal in the Initial Report to seek public comment. Some Working Group members expressed concerns that this proposal seems to be based on a misconception that ICANN’s Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs)[1] with URS Providers are not enforceable. Those Working Group members noted that MOU is enforceable and has termination clauses. 

Working Group Question for Public Comment: The Working Group seeks public comment on additional elements, if any, that need to be included to enhance ICANN’s MOUs with URS Providers and enforce their compliance. 

[1] ICANN has established MoUs with three URS Providers. MoU between ADNDRC and ICANN: http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/partnership-mous/adndrc-urs-17apr13-en.pdf; MoU between FORUM and ICANN: http://www.icann.org/en/about/agreements/partnership-mous/naf-urs-20feb13-en.pdf; MoU between MFSD and ICANN: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/mfsd-urs-20aug15-en.pdf.