> 
> One of the problems Vic, is that the two have always gone 
> hand in hand with past experience.
> 

I am not sure that is true.

I don't think .com ever had restrictions on transferring licences, so
the implication that allowing a secondary market caused cybersquatting
is wrong.  

I think what really happened is that people perceived the value of
domain names in both the primary and secondary market - and subsequently
cybersquatting arose.    The value of domains has been steadily
increasing by the way - but cybersquatting has decreased due to other
measures.

One of the issues with cybersquatting in the gtld space - is the lack of
any eligibility checks at the time of the initial registration.  While
there are dispute resolution processes (and specific laws in some
countries) it is often expensive to identify the person that performed
the primary (or secondary) market registration.

Transferring licences is permissible in the .co.nz market - and this
does not seem to be particularly subject to cybersquatting.

Regards,
Bruce