Hello Don,

Everything you have written makes sense except for one thing.
Would it not make more sense that Domain names should be administrated by
the government?
If the manner in which .info and .biz are being globally marketed gives any
insight,
then clearly the current perception of a domain name is of something that
defines ones' mark of trade.
Certainly to this point, nearly all litigious proceedings regarding domain
ownership disputes have been fought and won on the basis of trademark law.

That being the case, wouldn't it make sense that the only logical home for
domain name records and administration
be with IP Australia.

I am certain that many synergies would already exist between the procedures
involved with administering and registering patents, trademarks and domain
names.
After all; they have sat right next to another thus far in many a court room
dispute - so why not store them together - I am sure many people could do
with one less search fee from their attorney.

Regards

Michael

btw

In response to Richards response just now.......

Richard, it's not what you take from a public information base, it's what
you do with it that counts. I can assure you that the arrival of the new
Privacy Act in December will put paid to all those "innovators" out there,
who think they can send brochures disguised as invoices and invoices
disguised as brochures to the "tick the box" set out there whom we want to
embrace our industry not shun it . Responsible service = valuable clients.



-----Original Message-----
From: Don Cameron [mailto:donc§mudgeeab.com.au]
Sent: Monday, 20 August 2001 10:41 AM
To: dns§auda.org.au
Subject: Re: [DNS] ING charging $250 non-refundable for .BIZ and .INFO


Hi Kim,

Apologies if my points were not adequately stated.

1/ Outside the IT industry, a growing number of people are beginning to
believe that unless these issues are addressed very quickly, the Australian
name-space may be better administered by a government authority.
Acknowledging the reasons for NOT doing this; proponents argue that issues
such as those constantly subject to banter on this list, would not be issues
at all if the namespace was managed by Government. To cite some concerns:

It is increasingly common for Government Department's to accept various
forms of sponsorship, however it is unlikely they would fail to acknowledge
this fact on any publicly accessible promotions. I.e.; Issues such as that
embroiling AuDA and NetRegistry would not have eventuated, because a
Government Dept. operating under policy would have clearly identified
NetRegistry as a corporate sponsor. They would similarly ensure other
sponsors (whether cash, service, or time donors), were provided with
equitable advertising opportunities. Of course this all relates to
perceptions, however recent discussions have highlighted just how important
it is for any public organisation to ensure it's not perceived to be in
collusion with a single corporate entity - albeit that the perception may be
completely untrue. The APNIC web is one very good example of an appropriate
sponsorship policy in action.

Government administration would also ensure any databases or client
information was retained in a manner so as not to be open to allegations of
information pilfering (whether justified or not - again in acknowledgement
that perceptions are usually the underlying reason for challenges in this
area).

I'm not suggesting that private administration is not capable of managing
these issues, (my hope is that it can, and that these comments will be
viewed as constructive towards this end), however my feeling is that unless
this is managed quickly, Government administrators may be forced to
intervene by simple weight of public concern - there is a lot of discussion
on these issues at present, particularly in the area of information
security - It may be that information placed in the AUIC database is freely
available, however industry is only now becoming aware of this fact, and
concerns are increasingly being expressed over administration of the
resource.

2/  I fully concede your point that 99% of IT businesses operate in an
ethical manner, however... (again relating to perceptions)... anyone privy
to discussions on this list must have their doubts after reading some of the
more blatant attempts to challenge issues by threats of legal intervention.
Unfortunately this maintains the image of an aloof industry answerable only
to itself... a perception shared by many, if not most who are not engaged in
the industry.

It's perhaps a paradigm of evolution and ignorance that the industry should
be perceived this way, because most of the IT professionals I know are
highly aware of the need to be accountable, and operate in a very ethical
manner - however there is a percpetion that some within the industry do
believe the hype, and seemingly feel their role is almost that of a dictator
to the ignorant masses and/or that they can do whatever they like within the
constraints of the legal framework (that business ethics has no part to
play) - a return to, or perhaps lost kudos from, the old main-frame days
when IT professionals did hold all the information "keys".

Again... I'm only citing perceptions... but I doubt if there is anyone on
this list who has been "in the trade" for more than decade or two, who has
not heard comments on this, or seen the change in these perceptions
first-hand, both within the industry and by those not engaged in IT.

Point being... If our namespace is not perceived to be being managed for the
good of all, and in accord with modern industry expectations of neutrality
within a highly competitive market-place, industry itself will over-ride any
current mechanisms - and we are already seeing the beginning of this - how
much more pressure are competitors likely to place on AuDA to ensure
competitive neutrality in the future? - and how much more pressure to ensure
information is maintained in a confidential manner? - I just hope the
organisation has sufficient resources to manage the issues and ride the
storm, and that Govt. intervention will not be necessary.

Rgds, Don

--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 353 subscribers.
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request§auda.org.au to be removed.