On Thu, 29 Jul 2004, Ross Wm. Rader wrote: > Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 05:19:08 -0400 > From: Ross Wm. Rader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Dave Warren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Gordon Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Neil Anderson Saunders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Domain Registry Services > > On 7/28/2004 10:04 PM Dave Warren noted that: > > > > How about where the domain is owned by a company rather then an > > individual? It's common for a company to use the company name as the > > "real name", and/or a roll account. > > In this case, the Administrative Contact would be required to authorize > the request. This is a big change over the current policy where > basically anyone can hold themselves out to be a representative of the > registrant. The new policy tightens this down significantly...example... > > microsoft.com > > Registrant: Microsoft Corp. > Admin Contact: Joe Smith, System Admin > Transfer authorized by: Bill Gates, on behalf of "Microsoft Corp." > > Technically, this is an illegitimate authorization. Even though Bill is > authorized to act on Microsoft's behalf, the only real party authorized > to transfer this name is the admin contact seeing as how the Registrant > really can't authorized it themselves (being that its a company, not a > person...)
And the situation if the Admin contact is itself a role account? Mark.
