Demanding respect and recognition ?  It's almost
laughable.

Would it be fair to say that Peter Dean registered the
following domain
names and uploaded his commercial websites knowing
there was a possibility
he was about to confuse and possibly deceive
Australian consumers?  He was
instructed by auDA to place the following warning on
the sites,  "If you
arrived here expecting the Australian Network
Information Centre (aunic)
Click Here"  Perhaps he should have been advised by
auDA to give up the idea
totally and save credibility.

www.aunic.com.au
www.aunic.net.au

The websites remain. An auDA Director clearly sees no
harm in possibly
misleading Australian consumers, and THAT is not
laughable. Should we accept
such arrogance and perhaps irresponsible behaviour,
simply because Peter
Dean is an auDA Director? Not a chance. One may gain
respect leading by
example, there is no place for arrogance and/or shonky
practices.



John 5

--- Peter <peter&#167;instra.com.au> wrote:
> A direct question to Dassa
> 
> If auDA ignore there legal advisors and accept
> yours... How would you view 
> the actions of the auDA board if auDA is
> successfully sued - would you ask 
> the board members to pay from their own pocket
> because of their 
> irresponsible behavior?
> 
> That's a straight question deserving a straight
> answer.
> 
> Peter Dean
> Chairman - The Instra Group
> Director - auDA
> My views are my own and do not necessarily reflect
> those of the 
> organisations mentioned above.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At 10:56 AM 3/23/02 +1100, you wrote:
> >|> -----Original Message-----
> >|> From: Ron Stark
> [mailto:ronstark&#167;businesspark.com.au]
> >|> Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2002 10:32 AM
> >|> To: 'dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au'
> >|> Subject: RE: [DNS] DNS List
> >|>
> >|>
> >|> My understanding ( and I am open to be corrected
> here) is
> >|> that a forum such
> >|> as this list falls under the Publications Act or
> similar, and as such
> >|> renders the publisher (auDA) liable for its
> content -
> >|> despite the fact that
> >|> they have no direct input.
> >|>
> >|> Look at Yahoo (I think) being sued for allowing
> Nazi
> >|> memorabilia to be sold
> >|> on its auction site.
> >
> >Websites are different to mailing lists.  The
> comparision can not be
> >made.  Also, the fact there are legal entities
> willing to take a case
> >does not mean the case is justified or the
> inferences correct.
> >
> >Logic tells me a mailing list is no different to
> the participants
> >posting directly.  The mailing list host only
> facilitates the subscriber
> >base.  They are not publishers but transport
> agents.  If mailing lists
> >are deemed to be legally publishers then Post
> Offices should also.  And
> >Phone Book distributers.  They all become liable
> for any content
> >distributed using their services.
> >
> >Don't mind me.  I'm getting fed up with the legal
> fraternity turning the
> >Internet into another litigation playground.
> >
> >Darryl (Dassa) Lynch.
> >
> >
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >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.  (319
> subscribers.)
> 
> 
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.  (319
> subscribers.)
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards®
http://movies.yahoo.com/