RE: [DNS] The need for a code of practice

RE: [DNS] The need for a code of practice

From: Larry Bloch <larry.bloch§>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 12:57:37 +1100

Your comments are all very well, but Melbourne IT has now placed the sort of
restrictions I called for that make a difference well over 12 months after
the practices of these companies started. Only now are Registry Keys
required. A little late, really.

On the one hand, you try to deflect blame from MIT - fair enough. On the
other hand, there ARE clearly measures you can - and now have - taken to

It may not be fact, but there is a general impression amongst your resellers
that MIT took no action on this issue for so long because as far as MIT is
concerned, these practices are viewed by MIT as effective outsourced revenue

I prefer to believe that the real reason it has taken so long is lack of
will, rather than proactive acceptance of the practice, but the point is
that in a post competition environment, do you really want all that bad
blood with your channel?

MIT has the relationship with ING/IRA. You left the door open and made
little attempt to close it. Its now pretty wide, and difficult to shut.
Individual action by Joshua/NetRegistry or whoever only occurs because MIT
have not demonstrated leadership here. We all look to MIT to resolve this.
ING/IRA are not going to stop voluntarily.

So yes, I do widen the target to include MIT/auDA/ACCC, and yes, I do make
fairly wild accusations - that's what makes the journo's write about it, but
I would far prefer MIT/auDA to demonstrate some leadership.

How about a Domain Industry Summit to discuss and address issues facing the
industry? How about a round table of ING/IRA/resellers/MIT/auDA. Perhaps it
can all be resolved amicably. Instead action is left to a few lone voices.

How about a little support for NetRegistry's stand? How about a little
public support for Joshua?


-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin&#167;]
Sent: Thursday, 29 November 2001 19:29
To: 'dns&#167;'
Subject: [DNS] The need for a code of practice

> Bloch did not limit his attack to those carrying out such
> practices--he also
> targeted Melbourne IT, the auDA and the ACCC for their
> failure to place
> appropriate restrictions on an industry rife with what he describes as
> unethical marketing practices.

And while we are at it, how about the parents of the individuals running
such organisations, or the schools that taught them.  I have heard such
arguments before.  We should focus the blame on those that misbehave not on
those associated with them.

While there are many on this list that seem to favour a dictatorship -
benevolent or otherwise, I prefer to operate within the laws of the country.
If action was possible under the Trade Practices Act, it would probably
already have been taken.  Otherwise, it is a matter of the industry working
together to develop codes of practice, and work collectively to educate the

Please note the comments from the Chairman of the ACA in the annual report:

" Voluntary industry codes are intended to provide dynamic, flexible
regulation for the industry and greater industry responsiveness for
consumers. After a slow start, the registration of 12 industry codes,
including six dealing specifically with consumer protection matters, means
the priority consumer issues identified in the Telecommunications Act have
now been addressed. Self-regulation in this area has been a success, and
industry appears to be taking its consumer responsibilities seriously.

The next challenge relates to how codes operate and are seen to be operating
in the interests of consumers. Industry commitment to voluntary code sign-up
and compliance is essential - self-regulation that relies on the regulator
for enforcement is self-defeating, and it is far better for industry to make
existing codes work rather than face mandatory requirements."


This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 327 subscribers.
Archived at (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167; to be removed.

This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 324 subscribers. 
Archived at (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167; to be removed.
Received on Fri Nov 30 2001 - 02:05:39 UTC

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