From: Ian Johnston <ian.johnston§infobrokers.com.au>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 23:25:32 +1100

Limited term allocations were considered as a way of ensuring that the
values of domain name licences were reflected over time rather than just at
the time of allocation.  Allowing trading of domain name licences is another
way of ensuring that a domain name continues to be held by the entity that
values it most.  Indeed, the new auDA scheme would appear to not prohibit
trading.  To do so may be anti-competitive and breach national competition

A main argument against limited term allocation is that it can discourage
entities from bidding and investing in such licences, as the investment
normally cannot be recovered at the end of the licence period.  This would
be particularly important if a market-based allocation system were operating
alongside the first-come-first-served allocation system for which no time
limits currently and effectively apply.  The re-allocation of licences to
competitors of the original licence holder may raise trade mark and
passing-off issues.

On another point related to your posting, there was little support for the
"gateway concept" in com.au, outlined in the Name Panel's various working
documents and the public discussion reports accessible at
<http://www.auda.org.au/policy/panel-name-2000/>, notably the final report

From the final report:  "Gateways    Both tenders and auctions could be
developed to enable the granting of special generic and geographic domain
name licences, requiring licensees to establish generic or geographic
gateway services and giving rights of shared access to eligible businesses."
In essence, a licence holder would have been required to manage this public
resource in the public interest.  For com.au generic name, this concept is
history.  But perhaps not so for geographic domain names in com.au or a new
.au domain.

Derek Whitehead appropriately points to the option of new .au domains.

The auction might well lead to the establishment of gateway services.  I
wouldn't be surprised if government agencies and industry bodies were to bid
for rights to some key industry, product and sectoral generic name licences.

Ian Johnston
Former auDA Panel Member
Policy Consultant, Small Enterprise Telecommunications Centre (SETEL)
http://www.setel.com.au   mailto:ian.johnston&#167;setel.com.au

SETEL is a national small business consumer association
advancing and representing the interest of Australian small business
as telecommunications and electronic commerce consumers

-----Original Message-----
From: Katie Halson [mailto:katie&#167;bluedoor.com.au]
Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2002 4:56 PM
To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au

Some thoughts.

For the majority of generic domain names an auction process is probably the
best way to go. I would imagine of the 3600 or so generic domains there will
be many that are not even applied for and bids will be low. Ie

For those domains of value ie Internet.com.au, trade.com.au etc I would
suggest they be removed from the auction process and licensed through a
panel or commitee. As licences are only for two years auDA would have the
right to revoke the licence. Every 2 years the domain name could be put to
tender, thereby restricting the commercial value of the name itself and
giving ample opportunity for other entities to utilise the domain.

I believe the main criteria for being approved should be that the domain
name is being utilised for its generic nature. Ie trade.com.au could be
utilised by a company that wishes to represent australian manufactures or
exports to the global community.

After all the internet was built around a community, exploited by commecial
entities and now lays somewhat abandoned and struggling for an identity.


... snip ...
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