Bruce: Thank you.  Unfortunately, despite my having been rather vocal on the
need for a decent Code of Practice, I was unable to attend.  I'm relieved
that the issue has been taken up for discussion.

Ron Stark

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Tonkin [mailto:Bruce.Tonkin§melbourneit.com.au]
Sent: Tuesday, 18 December 2001 7:33 PM
To: 'dns§lists.auda.org.au'
Subject: RE: [DNS] Notional value of a domain name


Hello Ron,
> 
> My difficulty remains.  Apparently to support the right of auDA to
> "confiscate" a domain name, it is deemed to have no intrinsic 
> value.  Yet on
> the other hand, to support auDA's right to auction a name to 
> the highest
> bidder, it is deemed instead to have a value.
> 

I think you are confusing two issues.  Of course a domain name has value to
the company that is using that domain name.  Just as any licence (liquor
licence, taxi licence, spectrum licence) has value.  Any licence can also be
revoked if the person/company no longer complies with the terms of the
licence.

One issue that came up at the Code of Practice meeting last week, was under
what conditions and how should a licence be transferred.  Under the current
policy it is not possible.
Many people have objected to the possibility of offering a ".com.au" domain
for sale on the basis that it encourages cybersquatters.  However this
approach penalises those that legitimately build value in a domain name
through the association of that domain name with a well known brand.  I
believe we need to consider a policy change that allows a domain name to be
sold under particular conditions.  I believe there is precedence in other
areas of licencing where a licence can be sold to another party.

Bruce Tonkin

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the 
author, further information at the above URL.  (327 subscribers.)