RE: [DNS] FW: [DNS] is in the same boat ?

RE: [DNS] FW: [DNS] is in the same boat ?

From: Baljevic, Dusan <Dusan.Baljevic§>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:00:28 +1100

May I join your discussion for the first time. So far, I have
been a quiet reader. 

As a person who administered and registered about 800-900 
domain names world-wide, I think I have some knowledge to 
comment :)

It is very intriguing that, like in all history books, 
every side finds a suitable date and measures time from it.

What stops a person with a family name Brisbane (who can 
prove that 200-300 years ago his family name was exclusive 
to him) and ask for loyalties from Brisbane City Council?
Or a person called McDonnalds to pull out some history
books and prove that 1,000 years ago his family was a sole
owner of the name? Or what about Sydney (or should I 
say Lord Sydney)? Maybe one day his ancestors come to us
and ask us to pay for using his name. What a nonsense,
isn't it?

Rules should be simple (and the new proposal is
correcting it):

1. Who rightfully manages to register a business or
company name, has the privilege to register the
same domain name as well.

2. If Brisbane City Council is a registered commercial
organization, then they have right, like anyone else, to 
ask for

3. Typically, Brisbane City is NOT a commercial entity
so, if government accepts a registration of a business
called Brisbane Ltd (or whatever) from another company, 
then they must be aware that domain names must follow 
the same logic.

4. The importance of Internet has become
crucial for business, nobody is silly to register 
a business name without planning to take the same
domain name. 

5. So, if a registration of a company or business name
is approved, there should be no obstacles in
registering domain name of the same kind.

I remember the case, several years back, when there 
was a little business name here in NSW called Baud.
On their behalf, I tried to register
and was declined because the name was too "generic".
In the end, the company choose a very silly domain name,
and because nobody could remember it, they went out of
business (nobody visited their WWW pages, and so
on). Who benefited? You can guess it :)

I am looking forward to seeing the new proposals approved 
and in action as soon as possible and congratulate
auda for taking steps to make changes.

Best wishes,

Dusan U. Baljevic, BSEE(First Class Honours)
Corporate IT, Manager
Mayne Ltd.
Phone:     +61 2 9005 7847
           0412 041 715
Facsimile: +61 2 9005 7846

-----Original Message-----
From: James Liakos [mailto:James.Liakos&#167;]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 6:07 AM
To: 'dns&#167;'
Subject: [DNS] FW: [DNS] is in the same boat

So does that mean that our domain might go to a town
called Blackwoods even though we have had this domain for over a few years
now ?

James Liakos
Network Administrator
J. Blackwood & Son Limited

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Lawrence [mailto:jon&#167;]
Sent: Wednesday, 7 February 2001 6:56 AM
To: 'dns&#167;'
Subject: RE: [DNS]

WIPO awarded to the Barcelona City Council in August...,1151,17627,00.html

-----Original Message-----
From: stacy green [mailto:stacymoxham&#167;]
Sent: Wednesday, 7 February 2001 12:56 AM
To: dns&#167;
Subject: [DNS]

How do The Brisbane City Council think they are going
to get even WIPO could not be that
pethetic. has had this name listed for sale for
ages. I read their comments on their web page and they
don't seem to be too nice towards Cr Quinn.  

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

Received on Wed Feb 07 2001 - 06:04:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:04 UTC