From: David Keegel <djk§>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 00:03:43 +1100 (EST)
My understanding is that the current generic auction is purely a one-time
event (in respect of those domain names anyway).  It is just a transition
measure to get us from a situation where generics are not available to
one where generics are available for registration (at least in policy),
in an orderly fashion.

My understanding is that once an organisation pays for a reservation
certificate and then pays for a 2 year registration, they would have
the same presumptive right of renewal as any other registrants, so
there would be no difference between generic and non-generic domains,
once the auction process and associated things are finished.  I expect
the renewal price would be the same regardless.

I'm not suggesting there is an automatic right of renewal for everyone -
it is possible that the registrant is no longer eligible to license that
domain due to a change of company/business name, for example.

On the question of trading, I don't think there is anything inherently
anti-competitive about having a non-transferable license.  We are not
talking about a piece of property that you can own.

] Katie
] 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
] policy.
] 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, outlined in the Name Panel's various working
] documents and the public discussion reports accessible at
] <>, 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 generic name, this concept is
] history.  But perhaps not so for geographic domain names in 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)
]   mailto:ian.johnston&#167;
] 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;]
] Sent: Thursday, 24 January 2002 4:56 PM
] To: dns&#167;
] Subject: Re: [DNS] INTERNET.COM.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, 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 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.
] Katie
] ... snip ...
] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
] List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
] Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the 
] author, further information at the above URL.  (331 subscribers.)

 David Keegel <djk&#167;>  URL:
Cybersource P/L: Unix Systems Administration and TCP/IP network management
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