DNS and Spam

DNS and Spam

From: Chris Disspain <ceo§auda.org.au>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:02:52 +1000
Ian,

With respect, I do not agree with your analysis but do thank you for
raising the issue which is an important one.

	" If auDA's and the ACCC's regulatory frameworks were effective,
inappropriate market behaviour should, by and large, 	cease."

It has, by and large, ceased. In the last 12 months the only major
problems have been with companies 'outside' the industry (ie not
registrars or resellers) and have involved the same group of people. I
am not suggesting that the current situation with DNA is either
satisfactory or acceptable. It is not and it is being dealt with.

auDA does not rush to the DNS list or media flagging the action we are
taking in response to 'scams'. It would be inappropriate for us to do
so. However, we do (often in consultation with ACCC) take action as has
been evidenced by the successful proceedings against IRA (taken by ACCC)
and ING and NetRegister/Rafferty (taken by auDA).

I think it is important to understand the meaning of the words being
used so that we can be clear what we are discussing in this debate.

You use the word 'industry' in several places in your email below. What
do you mean by this? Do you mean those dealing with domain names in .au
or those dealing with domain names generally? There is an important
distinction here. For example, you will be aware that the vast majority
of the DNA mail out is offering names in the gTLD spaces not in .au.

You say " Indications are that these frameworks are, in part,
ineffective - too cumbersome, slow, costly". Could you please clarify
what frameworks you are referring to?

You refer to desired outcomes not being achieved according to some
community standards. What are the desired outcomes and what are the
community standards to which you refer?

You refer to ineffective deterrent and enforcement mechanisms. Which of
the deterrent and enforcement mechanisms do you believe to be
ineffective?

I look forward to your response so that I may more properly answer the
questions you are raising.

Best Regards, 

Chris Disspain
CEO - auDA
ceo&#167;auda.org.au
www.auda.org.au
 



-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Johnston [mailto:ian.johnston&#167;infobrokers.com.au] 
Sent: Friday, 25 July 2003 9:43 AM
To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
Cc: jon&#167;jonlawrence.com
Subject: RE: [DNS] DNS and Spam

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kim Davies [mailto:kim&#167;cynosure.com.au]
> Sent: 25 July 2003 3:11 AM
> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
> Subject: [DNS] DNS and Spam
> Sorry to take things off on a tangent a little..

Kim, your not heading off on a tangent as I see it - you're spot on.

I was about the post the following, in response to Jon Lawrence and
Skeeve
Stevens (see their emails below), when I saw your email.

--

The following comments and opinions are put forward with a view to
advancing
debate - I'm not wedded to them.

If auDA's and the ACCC's regulatory frameworks were effective,
inappropriate
market behaviour should, by and large, cease.

Indications are that these frameworks are, in part, ineffective - too
cumbersome, slow, costly ...  That is, they are not achieving desired
outcomes,
according to some community standards.  That's what I hear many in the
industry
saying, and that's what I observe.

Ultimately consumers of domain name services meet the cost of market and
(any)
regulatory failure.  Ineffective deterrent and enforcement mechanisms
impose
costs on auDA, ACCC, bona fide industry players and consumers.
Consumers and
taxpayers fund these mechanisms.

With continuing market and regulatory failure - including failure due to
the
limitations of the regulatory framework(s) - the case for further
government
intervention seems compelling, unless the domain name industry /
co-regulators
can demonstrate that they can effectively deal with inappropriate market
behaviour.

I'm tending to the view that national legislation is probably required.
For
example, consideration might be given to addressing issues in the
context of the
(electronic) spam legislation announced yesterday by the Minister for
Communications, Information Technolgy and the Arts
<http://www.dcita.gov.au/Article/0,,0_1-2_15-4_115938,00.html>.

A case could be made for the legislation to also deal with
non-electronic spam
relating to domain names.  Indeed, the case can be made for the
legislation to
address the domain name industry's and consumers' concerns.

I'm away from email till much later today.

Ian


--
Ian Johnston, Policy Consultant
Small Enterprise Telecommunications Centre (SETEL)
www.setel.com.au   mailto:ian.johnston&#167;setel.com.au
02 6251 7848 (B)   02 6251 7835 (F)   0413 990 112 (M)

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


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Lawrence [mailto:jon&#167;jonlawrence.com]
> Sent: 24 July 2003 7:56 PM
> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
> Subject: RE: [DNS] Domain Names Australia - How to stop them
>
>
> If they're registering the names as a retail client, how do you
identify
> the order as coming from DNA? Block their email address? They'll just
use
> a different one.  Block their IP address? Ditto.
>
> It's my understanding that the appropriate manner in which to deal
with
> issues such as this where the party involved is operating outside of
> a contractual
> relationship with auDA is under the relevant provisions of the Trade
Practices
> Act, and/or state-based trading standards legislation.  I believe that
auDA
> is already pursuing this matter in conjunction with the ACCC.
>
> jon
>
> >-- Original Message --
> >Reply-To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
> >From: "Skeeve Stevens" <skeeve&#167;skeeve.org>
> >To: <dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au>
> >Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 19:31:35 +1000
> >Subject: [DNS] Domain Names Australia - How to stop them
> >
> >Ok. Am I completely on the wrong track here. or isn't it quite easy
to
> >stop people like Domain Names Australia.
> >
> >When something happens like their current campaign, auDA should issue
an
> >order to all current registrars, including AusRegistry, to not accept
> >any more domain applications from DNA.
> >
> >That way, any money they do collect, is simply classified as fraud,
> >since they haven't actually provided a service (i.e. Domain Name).
> >
> >Maybe auDA needs to update policies and their registrar agreements,
so
> >that they can issue a 'Block' when someone launches a campaign like
> >this.
> >
> >Is this on the right track?
> >
> >If you block their ability to register domains. then they are simply
out
> >of business.. How easy is that?
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________________
> >Skeeve Stevens, RHCE     Email: skeeve&#167;skeeve.org
> >Website: www.skeeve.org  - Telephone: (0414) 753 383
> >Address: P.O Box 1035, Epping, NSW, 1710, Australia
> >
> >eIntellego - skeeve&#167;eintellego.net - www.eintellego.net
> >_______________________________________________________
> >Si vis pacem, para bellum

--

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kim Davies [mailto:kim&#167;cynosure.com.au]
> Sent: 25 July 2003 3:11 AM
> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
> Subject: [DNS] DNS and Spam
>
>
> Sorry to take things off on a tangent a little..
>
> I haven't been following recent spam developments in Australia lately,
> but the flurry of articles in the media has been hard to miss...
>
> One article that caught my eye was at
> http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php?id=589997653&fp=16&fpid=0
> which reads in part:
>
>     Notably, the legislation also contains major concessions to
>     the direct marketing industry, who will be allowed to continue
>     to harvest Australian e-mail addresses on .com.au sites on the
>     Internet, essentially for the purpose of business to business
>     marketing.
>
> Is this true? Surely this represents a fundamental loophole and
> misunderstanding of the role of second level domains.
>
> Having an email address end in .com.au does not at all signify that
the
> users of that domain are commercial enterprises. On the contrary, many
> (most?) ISPs in Australia hand out email addresses under this 2LD to
all
> their customers.
>
> Secondly, such practice seemingly legitimises spamming .com.au domain
> holders for the purposes of domain name renewal.
>
> I sincerely hope this is either an oversimplification or the author
got
> it wrong. I'd hate to see .com.au die off because it became some
> legitimated spammer refuge.
>
> kim
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
> 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.  (336 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.  (336 subscribers.)
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:07 UTC