I'm not going to dig through their books, I don't have the time and that's a job for lawyers. But I was around when ICANN was created and I know what their job is, and preventing these kinds of abuses by registrars is right at the top of their priority list.
> They are obligated to process a transfer at the request of the owner and new registrar, subject to certain timing and other rules. They are not, AFAICT, required to arrange such a transfer proactively.
That isn't what I meant. I only meant that if they were going to refuse to perform their duties as a registrar for one particular customer then they should provide that customer a means to switch registrars.
What they did instead is a kind of theft, regardless of how you feel about that particular customer. (not a fan, myself, as I've stated).
They may own the name such that it would be improper to allow someone else to register it, but there entitlement to service from the registrar is based on the terms of the contract they have signed.
> ICANN should probably get involved and punish Network Solutions for this action.
What specific ICANN policy has been violated?
> Network Solutions might be within their rights to choose to no longer 'host' the domain name themselves, but in that case they must be obligated to arrange for a transfer to a different registrar.
They are obligated to process a transfer at the request of the owner and new registrar, subject to certain timing and other rules. They are not, AFAICT, required to arrange such a transfer proactively.