Changes

In October, 2012, just before the [[ICANN 45]] Meeting in Toronto, [[ICANN CEO]] [[Fadi Chehadé]] stated that due to European privacy laws, European [[registrar]]s may be exempt from the proposed new [[Whois]] verification requirements. It was emphasized that the GAC had already endorsed the measures, with relevant laws in mind. This suggestion would seemingly create 2 different RAAs, which would arguably create inequitable standards between international registrars.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10734-icann-says-eu-registrars-could-be-exempt-from-stringent-new-whois-rules ICANN Says EU Registrars Could be Exempt from Stringent new Whois Rules]</ref> This came after another European body, the Council of Europe, expressed its concern over the privacy requirements in the proposed RAA.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10744-council-of-europe-has-whois-privacy-concerns-too Council of Europe Has Whois Privacy Concerns too, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

In October, 2012, just before the [[ICANN 45]] Meeting in Toronto, [[ICANN CEO]] [[Fadi Chehadé]] stated that due to European privacy laws, European [[registrar]]s may be exempt from the proposed new [[Whois]] verification requirements. It was emphasized that the GAC had already endorsed the measures, with relevant laws in mind. This suggestion would seemingly create 2 different RAAs, which would arguably create inequitable standards between international registrars.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10734-icann-says-eu-registrars-could-be-exempt-from-stringent-new-whois-rules ICANN Says EU Registrars Could be Exempt from Stringent new Whois Rules]</ref> This came after another European body, the Council of Europe, expressed its concern over the privacy requirements in the proposed RAA.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/10744-council-of-europe-has-whois-privacy-concerns-too Council of Europe Has Whois Privacy Concerns too, DomainIncite.com]</ref>

In early 2013, ICANN and the [[Registrar Stakeholder Group]] hit an impasse in their negotiations. It seems that while they agree on many points, with both sides making concessions and compromises, the main sticking point was ICANN's insistence on a unilateral right to amend, which was also a contentious addition to ICANN's new [[Registry Agreement]] for new gTLD operators. The addition would give the [[ICANN Board]] the right to amend the RAA in any way it sees fit by a 2/3 majority vote. It seems that this may be part of new CEO, [[Fadi Chehadé]]'s, strategy at making the industry more accountable and better regarded, and also a way to avoid extended debate and negotiations over future contracts. ICANN published its suggested agreement for public comments in the midst of ongoing negotiations, given that the efforts had stalled.  

In early 2013, ICANN and the [[Registrar Stakeholder Group]] hit an impasse in their negotiations. It seems that while they agree on many points, with both sides making concessions and compromises, the main sticking point was ICANN's insistence on a '''unilateral right to amend''', which was also a contentious addition to ICANN's new [[Registry Agreement]] for new gTLD operators. The addition would give the [[ICANN Board]] the right to amend the RAA in any way it sees fit by a 2/3 majority vote. It seems that this may be part of new CEO, [[Fadi Chehadé]]'s, strategy at making the industry more accountable and better regarded, and also a way to avoid extended debate and negotiations over future contracts. ICANN published its suggested agreement for public comments in the midst of ongoing negotiations, given that the efforts had stalled.  

Points of agreement include: new [[Whois]] accuracy measures, featuring a challenge-response mechanism for first-time registrants via email or phone verification; addresses submitted will have to meet the Universal Postal Union standards, and phone numbers must conform to [[ITU]] formatting; the address will have to be verified to be an actual location, though proof of residence or ownership by the registrant will not be required; registrants providing false information that fail verification will have 15 days to correct the information before facing suspension of the domains. A further sticking point beyond the unilateral right to amend is ICANN's request that registrars verify their customer records, which tend to be more accurate than [[Whois]] records.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/12182-registrars-and-icann-hit-impasse-on-new-raa Registrars And ICANN Hit Impasse On New RAA, DomainIncite.com] Retrieved 1 April 2013</ref>

Points of agreement include: new [[Whois]] accuracy measures, featuring a challenge-response mechanism for first-time registrants via email or phone verification; addresses submitted will have to meet the Universal Postal Union standards, and phone numbers must conform to [[ITU]] formatting; the address will have to be verified to be an actual location, though proof of residence or ownership by the registrant will not be required; registrants providing false information that fail verification will have 15 days to correct the information before facing suspension of the domains. A further sticking point beyond the unilateral right to amend is ICANN's request that registrars verify their customer records, which tend to be more accurate than [[Whois]] records.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/12182-registrars-and-icann-hit-impasse-on-new-raa Registrars And ICANN Hit Impasse On New RAA, DomainIncite.com] Retrieved 1 April 2013</ref>