What Is Agreement Registry

5. Transfer/transfer cases: the biggest confusion for a buyer is in case of transfer or transfer request. A buyer buys real estate under construction on the secondary market. A tripartite allocation is executed between the builder, buyer and seller. The secret is in the execution of real estate records. Logically, in this case, a contractor cannot register a property with UDS, since the sales contract is not signed with the new buyer. I have observed that the owner always prefers the real estate register to UDS or the value of the sales contract of the original buyer. The reason is that the sub-registrar will never know that the property under construction has changed hands. Your domain name registration in a ccTLD (a “new TLD domain name”) is governed by the guidelines and service agreements defined by the registration (or operator of such a registration) for such a new TLD domain name (“New TLD registration”) as registration for their respective first-level domain, or revised from time to time. You can check the current policies and service agreements of each new TLD registration (“New TLD Registration Rules”) on the website of the new TLD. The registration policy for .bz is available at www.belizenic.bz/support/legal.php.B. You agree to be bound and comply with the new TLD registration rules in effect, including changes and changes to your registration to the new TLD domain names.

On March 26, 2014, the new gTLD program committee (NGPC) of the ICANN Steering Committee adopted a resolution approving a registration specifications 13 for the brand category. A provision of specification 13 gives a . BRAND registry operators the ability to appoint up to three ICANN-accredited registrars to serve as the exclusive registrar for their TLD. When the NGPC approved specifications 13 on March 26, 2014, implementation of this provision was delayed by 45 days for GNSO Recommendation 19 for the introduction of new top-level generic domains. After reviewing the matter, the GNSO Board communicated to ICANN in correspondence exchanged on May 9, 2009. May 2014 [PDF, 366 KB] that the GNSO Council, while considering that the change in the original policy was inconsistent with Recommendation 19, did not reject the change in the original policy in its entirety and made it known in the form of a vote on a request adopted at the GNSO TIP meeting of 8 May 2014.