Re: [DNS] thread.119

Re: [DNS] thread.119

From: Patrick Corliss <patrick§>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 19:10:27 +1100
On Wed, 16 Jan 2002 22:04:15 +1100, Adrian Stephan wrote:

> Kim keeps mentioning about the fairness of the auction.  What I don't think
> is fair is that ASIC has a set of rules that preclude anyone from  having a
> company name too close to an existing name.

Hi Adrian

I am not at all sure what you mean by "too close".  I am the proprietor of the
following registered company:

ACN 065 556 229        Fraud Control Pty Limited

In relation to Business Names, the NSW Dept of Fair Trading considers the word
"services" to be one of those neutral words with no regulatory effect.  Yet
ASIC has allowed the following company registration:

 ACN 002 129 400       Fraud Control Services Pty Limited

With two significant words, that's a pretty close match, imo.  I will be happy
for you to devote as much energy complaining to ASIC as you do complaining
about "logistics".


> For those who try to use logic - forget it.  This is all about power.

In any regulatory system there are inevitably loopholes and inequities.  A
criminal defence lawyer I once met in Court made a fortune out of exploiting
such loopholes to get people acquitted of crimes they had committed.

I watched him at work.  It was a real eye-opener.  He even claimed that the
relevant law was not in force on the date of the alleged offence.  What a
shocker !!

In the trade that's called "getting people off on a technicality".

That's not fair either.  However, the system was not designed to be unfair.

Patrick Corliss
I'm on the Board of auDA (the .au country code) as well as TLDA (the Top
Level Domain Association).   Please note that anything I write is my own
personal opinion and does not necessarily reflect the views of any body
with which I am associated.  Please also note IANAL (I Am Not A Lawyer).
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

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