ICANN participation

I got notice yesterday evening of a class action brought to in a US Court against RF, eNom and ICANN.

Although I can understand why the plaintiff is naming eNom and ICANN ( though i don't think that she will succeed in demonstrating that there were illegal conduct from both ) it is somewhat baffling why some other registrars and registries are left alone from this action.

On the process of trying to solve the problem ICANN stated that it had come to an agreement with the registries (all? some of them?) so domains would not be lost.

But what was the registries' approach to this agreement?

I would assume that the best option would have been to mark all RF-registered domains with a REGISTRY-LOCK status, thus preventing RF to modify the domains and to prevent the domains from expiring.

Has this been done this way? Well, apparently no. The option was more in the line of making affeceted domains something like "Server Deletion Prohibited". This only kept domains from deleting, not from expiring. For those registrants who depended on their domains remaining active this amounts to little more than nothing.