Changes

Law enforcement officials, particularly the Serious Organized Crime Agency (SOCA) in the United Kingdom and the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), asked ICANN to implement procedures to curb incidence of abuse in the [[DNS|domain name system]] (DNS). The two agencies proposed some measures to be incorporated in the RAA such as stronger verification of registrants' name, address, phone number, e-mail address and method of payment for domain names.<ref>[http://www.pcworld.com/article/191735/law_enforcement_push_for_stricter_domain_name_rules.html Law Enforcement Push for Stricter Domain Name Rules]</ref>

Law enforcement officials, particularly the Serious Organized Crime Agency (SOCA) in the United Kingdom and the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), asked ICANN to implement procedures to curb incidence of abuse in the [[DNS|domain name system]] (DNS). The two agencies proposed some measures to be incorporated in the RAA such as stronger verification of registrants' name, address, phone number, e-mail address and method of payment for domain names.<ref>[http://www.pcworld.com/article/191735/law_enforcement_push_for_stricter_domain_name_rules.html Law Enforcement Push for Stricter Domain Name Rules]</ref>

In October, 2011, at the [[ICANN 42]] meeting in Dakar, Senegal, the [[ICANN Board]] approved the immediate negotiation between ICANN and Registrar Negotiation Team regarding the proposed amendments to the RAA. The amendment topics, which included law enforcement, registrant protection and internet stability, were recommended by the [[GAC|Governmental Advisory Committee]] (GAC)and the [[GNSO]] Working Group. The result of the amendment negotiations were to be considered by ICANN during its meeting in [[ICANN Costa Rica|Costa Rica]] in March, 2012.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-28oct11-en.htm#7 Registrar Accreditation Agreement Amendments]</ref>

In October, 2011, at the [[ICANN 42]] meeting in Dakar, Senegal, the [[ICANN Board]] approved the immediate negotiation between ICANN and Registrar Negotiation Team regarding the proposed amendments to the RAA. The amendment topics, which included law enforcement, registrant protection and internet stability, were recommended by the [[GAC|Governmental Advisory Committee]] (GAC) and the [[GNSO]] Working Group. The result of the amendment negotiations were to be considered by ICANN during its meeting in [[ICANN Costa Rica|Costa Rica]] in March, 2012.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-28oct11-en.htm#7 Registrar Accreditation Agreement Amendments]</ref>

On December 13th, ICANN announced an open comment period on the Preliminary GNSO Issue Report regarding the RAA amendments, to close one month later. Comments on the prelininary report were to be considered for the Final Issue Report, to be presented to the [[GNSO]] council following the closure of the comment period. This was done in anticipation of discussions at the [[ICANN 43]] meeting in Costa Rica, at the request of the Board.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-12dec11-en.htm Preliminary GNSO Issue Report on the Registrar Accreditation Agreement Amendments]</ref>

On December 13th, ICANN announced an open comment period on the Preliminary GNSO Issue Report regarding the RAA amendments, to close one month later. Comments on the prelininary report were to be considered for the Final Issue Report, to be presented to the [[GNSO]] council following the closure of the comment period. This was done in anticipation of discussions at the [[ICANN 43]] meeting in Costa Rica, at the request of the Board.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-12dec11-en.htm Preliminary GNSO Issue Report on the Registrar Accreditation Agreement Amendments]</ref>

* Some registrars refused to acknowledge the changes and were advocating walking-away from the negotiations

* Some registrars refused to acknowledge the changes and were advocating walking-away from the negotiations

===NTIA===

===NTIA===

In October, 2012, [[NTIA]] Secretary [[Larry Strickling]] wrote to ICANN in part to commend it on its recent successes and also to encourage it to continue to work on issues in need of further attention or improvement. One of the successes that Sec. Strickling notes is the "significant effort to accomodate the law enforcement recommendations, as endorsed by the [[ICANN]]'s [[Governmental Advisory Committee]] (GAC), in a new Registrar Accreditation Agreement." NTIA participates in ICANN via the [[GAC]].http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/strickling-to-crocker-04oct12-en Strickling to Crocker 04oct12, ICANN.org]</ref>

In October, 2012, [[NTIA]] Secretary [[Larry Strickling]] wrote to ICANN in part to commend it on its recent successes and also to encourage it to continue to work on issues in need of further attention or improvement. One of the successes that Sec. Strickling notes is the "significant effort to accomodate the law enforcement recommendations, as endorsed by the [[ICANN]]'s [[Governmental Advisory Committee]] (GAC), in a new Registrar Accreditation Agreement." NTIA participates in ICANN via the [[GAC]].<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/correspondence/strickling-to-crocker-04oct12-en Strickling to Crocker 04oct12, ICANN.org]</ref>

 

===European Union===

===European Union===

In January 2014, a European Union data protection body sent a letter to ICANN for the second time, saying that the 2013 RAA violated a number of EU privacy laws. The same body sent ICANN a letter in July of 2013 and ICANN responded by stating that the body did not have legal authority to voice the opinion of the entire EU.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/15680-eu-body-tells-icann-that-2013-raa-really-is-illegal EU Body Tells ICANN that 2013 RAA Really is Illegal, DomainIncite] Retrieved 29 Jan 2014</ref>

In January 2014, a European Union data protection body sent a letter to ICANN for the second time, saying that the 2013 RAA violated a number of EU privacy laws. The same body sent ICANN a letter in July of 2013 and ICANN responded by stating that the body did not have legal authority to voice the opinion of the entire EU.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/15680-eu-body-tells-icann-that-2013-raa-really-is-illegal EU Body Tells ICANN that 2013 RAA Really is Illegal, DomainIncite] Retrieved 29 Jan 2014</ref>