hello all

Hello Maxim

and everyone

Please review ICANN Expected Standards of Behavior here: https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/expected-standards-2016-06-28-en

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-f9Ml-z9LcxVs9WuX53kIkp29j0JLh6d/edit

correct

should apply as the same legal entity

Agree that's the problem to be solved by the EPDP

good chance it might miss that

because here there are no rules established, so it is not possible to follow it in transfer pdp

I think Jeff is correct, but I can confirm with colleagues who are supporting the Transfer Policy PDP

A quick check on the proposed charter for transfer policy doesn’t reveal IDN or variant related questions, but we will reconfirm

Essentially it would be requesting the transfer of linked names associated with 1 auth code?

transfer to another registrar - might be ok, but to another entity is a trouble

I think its a flag for completeness to be mindful of the Transfer Policy and any implications.

@Maxim - same principle - a transfer of 1 of the linked names results in the transfer of all linked names

new hand

my question is - should we add this question or not to the charter

about the same registrar

I believe we may already have a charter question for this, but we will check

Is it because there may be variants unknown to the applicants?

in part, yes

example too

Agree it needs to be consistent

Hand up

Thanks Dennis

keep going

to the top of the hour? yes.

and IGO ;(

new hand

Essentially we are saying all linked names need to be transferred

I agree with Jeff. How UDRP applies to a variant depends on the policy decided by the EPDP on the treatment of same entity.

The Working Group will need to decide what to do with respect to the Same Entity. If they decide that the same entity controls, then the transfer of one linked name results in the transfer of all linked names.

why do we miss URS?

+1 Donna, it is about the grounds for a decision

currently UDRP and URS do not know about the same entity ifea

idea

how the principle of the same entity propagates to RPMs and UDRP?

Maxim, until we have a same entity policy we really can't answer the question of how it propogates.

then we need to add those questions as - if yes - then

Hand up

I have to drop, suggest we continue from this item

I need to think it through a bit more Maxim. I hear your concern, but I'm not sure that changes to the UDRP or URS is required.

If the WG is going to have to look at RPMs as well as all of the other things, there is no way this can be an ePDP

we discussed this earlier and it could be included in the transfer discussion

Perhaps we should have as a charter question, that the WG consider any implications on UDRP, URS etc. of whatever is decided re single entity.

thx bye

Thanks all