And from the official web site. SPAM and the Internet You've probably seen, heard or even used the term "spamming" to refer to the act of sending unsolicited commercial email (UCE), or "spam" to refer to the UCE itself. Following is our position on the relationship between UCE and our trademark SPAM. Use of the term "spam" was adopted as a result of the Monty Python skit in which our SPAM meat product was featured. In this skit, a group of Vikings sang a chorus of "spam, spam, spam . . . " in an increasing crescendo, drowning out other conversation. Hence, the analogy applied because UCE was drowning out normal discourse on the Internet. We do not object to use of this slang term to describe UCE, although we do object to the use of the word "spam" as a trademark and to the use of our product image in association with that term. Also, if the term is to be used, it should be used in all lower-case letters to distinguish it from our trademark SPAM, which should be used with all uppercase letters. So as long as you don't call it SPAM your ok. Regards David Moore moored§romtech.com.au www.adsldirect.com.au for ADSL and Internet www.romtech.com.au for PC sales Office Phone: (+612) 9948 1199 Mobile Phone: +614 18 282 648 POSTAL ADDRESS: PO BOX 62 SEAFORTH NSW 2092 AUSTRALIA DELIVERY ADDRESS: SHOP 4, BROOK ROAD CORNER BROOK AND FRENCHS FOREST ROAD SEAFORTH NSW 2092 AUSTRALIA. -----Original Message----- From: James Pearce [mailto:james.pearce§zdnet.com.au] Sent: Friday, 25 July 2003 2:37 PM To: dns§lists.auda.org.au Subject: Re: [DNS] DNS and Spam The noun Spam is a form of tinned luncheon meat. Unsolicited (bulk etc) e-mail is spam. However you may feel about said tinned luncheon meat, it would be (and has been) considered libellous to link it to spam. James ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sean Finn" <sean§teknol.com.au> To: <dns§lists.auda.org.au> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 2:00 PM Subject: RE: [DNS] DNS and Spam > SPAM: > > Woolworths crap in your letterbox? heck no, its geographical blanket junk > mail, not targeted. NOT SPAM. > > Win a house competitions with your name on it, targeted letters sent by Aus > Post? Not spam, they got your details from a competition to win a car for > free in a supermarket or something. NOT SPAM. > > E.G. Company collects your *personal details* and sends targeted mail to you > via Aus.Post, when you DIDN't Sign up for a competition etc, and didn't > specifically agree to receive promotional material? > SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM > SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM > SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM > SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM > SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM SPAM > (Ahem). > > > > My Summary: > > Modern SPAM is Unsolicited Mail. Wether it be Electroinic or Traditional. > Spamming through a server sure costs money, but i think you are referring to > the verb SPAM, rather than the Noun Spam. > > SPAM(Noun) Unsolicited mail wether electronic or terrestrial. > SPAM(Verb) To relay mail through an unwilling third party's mail server, Or > to send terrestrial mail-outs using someone else's bulk-order barcode. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .me hands rod his ABN & passes .1c onto tax department as GST. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Discount Domain Name Services [mailto:rod§ddns.com.au] > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 1:44 PM > To: dns§lists.auda.org.au > Subject: RE: [DNS] DNS and Spam > > > Non electronic spam! Ian what is your understanding of spam! > Have you or your company ever been spammed due to an open proxy??(Do you > know what that is?) Have you ever had to pick up a $550 data bill due to > someone finding a hole in your system due to some outage or whatever(Do you > know what that is). This is the true meaning of spam stealing data from web > hosting companies or ISP's. Getting a few emails that are unsolicited use > something like spam assassin to filter out that, but stealing data (Spamming > data) is a crime that is no different to shop lifting. To call sending out > advertising via the mail spam is ridiculous that is like calling the > woolworths brochure placed in your letterbox non electronic spam. I > wholeheartly agree with the COC and how it has made the industry more > accountable but you cannot stop shonky operators, witness the bank scams of > only a couple of weeks ago. Education not legislation. > 1.1 cents worth > Rod Keys > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Disspain [mailto:ceo§auda.org.au] > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2003 1:03 PM > To: DNS List > Subject: [DNS] DNS and Spam > > > > > 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§auda.org.au > www.auda.org.au > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ian Johnston [mailto:ian.johnston§infobrokers.com.au] > Sent: Friday, 25 July 2003 9:43 AM > To: dns§lists.auda.org.au > Cc: jon§jonlawrence.com > Subject: RE: [DNS] DNS and Spam > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kim Davies [mailto:kim§cynosure.com.au] > > Sent: 25 July 2003 3:11 AM > > To: dns§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§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§jonlawrence.com] > > Sent: 24 July 2003 7:56 PM > > To: dns§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§lists.auda.org.au > > >From: "Skeeve Stevens" <skeeve§skeeve.org> > > >To: <dns§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§skeeve.org > > >Website: www.skeeve.org - Telephone: (0414) 753 383 > > >Address: P.O Box 1035, Epping, NSW, 1710, Australia > > > > > >eIntellego - skeeve§eintellego.net - www.eintellego.net > > >_______________________________________________________ > > >Si vis pacem, para bellum > > -- > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kim Davies [mailto:kim§cynosure.com.au] > > Sent: 25 July 2003 3:11 AM > > To: dns§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.) > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- - > 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.) > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- - > 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