On 12 Dec 2002 at 8:38, Josh Rowe wrote:

> A fat banker with a license to exploit society?
> 
> The names are all registered to the same registrant.
> 
> Still no bids.
> 
> 
> Josh
> --
> http://josh.id.au/
> 
> Domain Name:             banker.com.au
> Domain Name:             license.com.au
> Domain Name:             society.com.au
> Domain Name:             cellulite.com.au


All registered in the name of a WA based partnership.

They seem to be associated with the registrants of condom.net in some way (see 
http://comdom.net/about.php and the amazing content at 
http://comdom.net/cases_a.php).

It would be interesting if someone could "please explain" how  the registrant (two very 
young men) which only became an entity in the last 6 months could have convinced a 
registrar of their bona fides to licence these names and then a few weeks later offer 
them for sale in what appears to be in direct contravention of the basic rules of the au 
name regime.

There are dozens more "generic" .au domain names which have been registered 
recently (and not so recently) where the registrant can have no realistic right to have 
registered them. Yet auDA remain silent on what is on the face of it a clear abuse of the
 system.

The "who is" should include a field where the "right" to a domain is explicated. Where 
there is no apparent clear link via a registered business name or trademark  etc. a note 
as to the  reason the registrar accepted the registration. This would prevent any angst 
among those who might believe that the system is being abused.

cb