Re: DNS: Domain Registration in Australia

Re: DNS: Domain Registration in Australia

From: James Austin <jea§>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 1998 20:29:00 +1100

Finally someone who knows what they are talking about, I want to vote him
for president.

Congratulations! Well done!

I must Agree!

James Austin

Rainer Group Pty. Ltd.                       Voice:     +61 (0)2 9894 1985
PO Box 863                                         Fax:     +61 (0)2 9894
BAULKHAM HILLS NSW 2153           E-Mail:     jea&#167;
AUSTRALIA                                     WWW:

-----Original Message-----
From: Philip_Argy&#167; <Philip_Argy§>
To: dns&#167; <dns§>
Date: Thursday, 19 February 1998 11:41
Subject: Re: DNS: Domain Registration in Australia

>Here are some basics:
>A company name is the name of an incorporated entity.  Governed by uniform
>state law called the Corporations Law and administered by the Australian
>Securities Commission on behalf of every State and Territory.  Any
>incorporated entity wanting to carry on business in Australia must be
>registered under the Corporations Law.   Regular domestic entities get an
>ACN (Australian Company Number).  Foreign and non-standard entities get an
>ARBN (Australian Registered Business Number).
>A business name is required to be registered whenever a person or company
>wants to trade using a name OTHER THAN its own name.  Business Names
>legislation is State based and administered.  A company or an individual
>can own a business name.  It is only required so that anyone who wants to
>know the name of the entity carrying on business under that name can look
>up the register (= translate table) to see who the real entity is trading
>using the pseudonym.  Registration of a business name confers no rights to
>the name although it is impossible to register a name that is identical to
>one already registered.
>A non-profit organisation can also be incorporated under State based laws -
>no ACN or ARBN is required for those entities but they usually will not be
>looking for a domain anyway.
>A trade mark is the brand name by which goods or services are known.  A
>trade mark may be owned by anyone regardless of where they live but is
>liable to be struck off if not used by the registered owner for more than 3
>contiguous years.  A trademark may or may not be the same as a company or
>business name.  For example, Commodore is a trademark owned by the entity
>that we used to know as General Motors-Holden's Pty Ltd.  (I think it's
>recently changed its name to just Holden Pty Ltd).  Oracle is a trademark
>owned by Oracle Corporation.  A trademark identifies goods or services
>rather than entities.
>A domain name is normally chosen so that it is the most likely thing people
>will think of when they want to find you on the web.  Most organisations
>want to have a domain name that approximates their real name.  Some
>organisations are more likely to be searched for by their product with many
>people possibly not even knowing the formal name of the trading entity.
>For those people a domain name that approximates their trade mark would be
>In my view Melbourne IT (and any other current or potential NIC) should not
>impose any requirement whatsoever on an applicant for a domain name and
>should play no role in resolving disputes about names.  The safest approach
>is for them to register on a first come first served basis, although
>obviously if they form the view that someone has no motive other than to
>hijack a name for ransom I see no reason for them not to refuse the
>application.  This should be a sparingly exercised power, though.
>If someone uses a name in trade or commerce and that is misleading or
>deceptive because people think it belongs to someone else that will usually
>be actionable under the Trade Practices Act and that is where the fight
>should be held.  NIC's that want to set up dispute resolution mechanisms
>and complicated thresholds for applicants are just buying trouble in my
>view.  At the moment no-one can demand a domain name but it won't be long
>before a refusal to register a name is challenged and we may see some
>interesting law as a result!
>Philip Argy
>Vice President
>Australian Computer Society, Inc
>Economic, Legal & Social Implications Committee
>Intellectual Property, Trade Practices & Technology Group
>Mallesons Stephen Jaques
Received on Thu Feb 19 1998 - 21:35:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:03 UTC