RE: [DNS] auDA media release

RE: [DNS] auDA media release

From: Ron Stark <ronstark§>
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 08:42:32 +1000
Skeeve, some comments on your use of your "management role"

...does your T&C explicitly state that you have the right to arbitrarily
move a domain name between registrars?

How do you deal with the situation in which a consumer decides that they
want to stop dealing with you for whatever reason, then later on discovers
that their domain name is not with the registrar that they thought they were

What happens when a registrant comes to you because they've had a bad
experience with a certain registrar, only to later discover that you've
moved their domain back to that very registrar, under your so-called opt-in

Unless you can convince me otherwise, I don't believe that your actions can
be deemed to be opt-in, simply because of a vague inference in your T&C.

Ron Stark

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Skeeve Stevens [mailto:skeeve&#167;]
>Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 8:52 AM
>To: dns&#167;; 'Kim Davies'
>Subject: RE: [DNS] auDA media release
>No problems... I consider that the customer giving us
>Management control
>of the domain is 'opt-in'.
>Thanx for clearing that up.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ian Smith [mailto:smithi&#167;]
>Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 6:21 AM
>To: Kim Davies
>Cc: dns&#167;
>Subject: Re: [DNS] auDA media release
>On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Kim Davies wrote:
> > Skeeve Stevens wrote:
> > > As we have been given the management role of those to look after
>them, I  > > already consider us to have implicit permission, but I
>thought that they  > > should be informed and given a 'opt out'.  > >
> > > Does auDA see any problems with this?
> >
> > As a "consumer", I have a problem with this. I would rather see you
> > _explicit_ permission from your customer that you have the right to
> > change their registrar (I assume that is what you meant?).
> > your proposal sounds something very easily abused.
>Indeed.  As I read the new policy - of which I was blissfully unaware
>until Chris posted the advisory about an abuse of it; my fault for not
>keeping up I guess - and particularly the ACCC's comments on the draft,
>it seems that the protection of the registrant's control over his, her
>or its domain licence has won out on this one (applause for AuDA ..)
> > An email with a short opt-out time frame is ripe for abuse. Email is
> > unguaranteed medium, you could be sending the emails to the wrong
> > address etc. It should be opt-in, not opt-out.
>If I'm reading the policy right, it is opt-in only by the registrant.
> > In these areas I definately think it is important to side with the
> > consumer awareness rather than open loopholes.
>Yes.  I've just forwarded the new policy to one interested registrant.
>The ability to transfer without having to renew is worthy too,
> > kim
> > (speaking for myself as usual)
>Cheers, Ian
>(having noone else I could even pretend to speak for)
>List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
> Please do not retransmit articles on
>this list without permission of the
>author, further information at the above URL.  (368 subscribers.)
>List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
author, further information at the above URL.  (368 subscribers.)
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:06 UTC