From: <galen§>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 12:59:13 +0800
The auction is not _totally_ open - there's still policies to be mindful of
and these in turn have their own restrictions, eg. as bank 
is a restricted business term.

Further, you had to be eligible before the arbitrary 31 August 2001 date.

So... let's not go crazy here ;o)


> oh so you want to make a sex shop, now that's original :)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Katie Halson [mailto:katie&#167;]
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 3:24 PM
> To: dns&#167;
> Subject: Re: [DNS] INTERNET.COM.AU
> As I understood it generics were rejected as they represented industries 
> bodies as a whole in a similar way to geographical names and not because 
> any commercial focus. Auctions may be fair in a commercial sense however 
> they conflict with the existing policy.
> As a hypothetical.
> I run a large adult retail chain whose primary sales was through the
> internet and whose registered name is Australian Sex Shop on the 
> My business has been runnibg for 10 years and I am very rich. I am 
> to apply for which I do and successfully bid for. I 
> the price is worth it as the generic domain will drive traffic to my 
> Does this represent for 'what it is'?
> I can also apply and bid for
> on 24/1/02 3:04 PM, Kim Davies at kim&#167; wrote:
> >
> > I don't see how anyone can judge whether a company is going to "use the
> > domain for what it is", whatever that means. As it stands you need to
> > be eligible for the domain (i.e. by connection) as you have for other
> > domains. This has been the test for years, so why should the
> > generics be different?
> >
> > kim
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