On 14 Apr 2004 at 14:25, Kim Davies wrote:

> Quoting magic2147§optushome.com.au on Wednesday April 14, 2004:
> | 
> | For example at http://www.namescout.com/renewal/index.asp you can submit a 
> | query about a .au domain registered through this foreign registrar and be provided 
> | with the full expiry date and indeed an apparent offer to renew the domain regardless 
> | of the length of time to the expiry date. (As anyone can see the expiry date for 
> | namescout.com.au is 	August 3, 2004)
> 
> Whilst I agree with your sentiment, did you actually contact auDA and/or
> Namescout first with the specifics about this before announcing it to the 
> world? 
> 
> I know auDA has acted before in educating registrars when it has found
> this kind of things. Therefore, I am wondering if it is a case of auDA
> and the registrar ignoring your reports and you are contacting this list
> out of frustration as a last resort; or whether you have a disregard for
> people's privacy by not trying to get this fixed before you announce it.
> 
> kim
> 

Dear Kim

Yes I have contacted auDA by 'phone about this registrar and the service they 
provide. And specifically, regarding the disclosure of domain renewal dates.

I would have to say that their attitude could be described as one of indifference. That 
is, along the lines of "Oh you should write to the registrar about this in the first 
instance" rather than "Gee that's no good, we'll have a look and sort it out."

It seems to me that in any event I should not have to draw auDA's attention to this 
sort of thing. The organisation derives significant revenues from domain registrants 
and as the administrator of a cartel it should be doing this sort of quality control 
themselves and not waiting for the likes of me to draw their superior gaze towards  
flagrant breaches of their own practice rules.

Some time ago If my memory is correct,  I drew attention to the same problem via the 
board to a similar problem on a local registrar's web site. That  issue was fixed 
promptly.

Over the years I have drawn auDA's attention in writing to various matters relating to 
the apparent misuse of domain name data on several occasions .  I have never 
received any written response from auDA. When auDA was being run on a 
shoestring that was probably acceptable but now that revenues are substantial they 
should be doing a bit better.

I do not understand your point about privacy. These are large corporate bodies 
(auDA, Ausregistry and the registrars) deriving substantial revenues from registrants.  
They should be responsive to the f.o.c. forensic commentary they get here but often 
they are defensive to the point where it is laughable. That's why some of us get so 
much pleasure trolling them. They are not sixteen year old virgins although the way 
they squeal when their shortcomings are noted you would think they were. For mine if 
you are in business and someone points out a problem - wear it and fix it.


cb