On a serious level, trying to look at it from the same side here, does anyone have any proposals for allowing easy transfer and disposal of .com.au domain names without inviting the domain name land grab solely for the purpose of making a buck when someone who wants the name finally comes along (AKA domain speculation).It is a practise I find offensive. Does making the step to allow easy transfer between non related entities then open the flood gates for the argument to allow domain speculation in .au? It may legitimize a pre existing black market trade in .au domains to the point of convenience, but will it then encourage a further, greater black market of domain speculation by making it just that little bit easier? I'd support the easy transferal of domains between TWO ELIGIBLE entities, but I would INSIST that AuDA itself, and not the registrars, perform the checks required to ensure that.. A) The loosing party had a legitimate claim, and is waiving that claim, B) The domain in question is put to public auction by Auda, with email notification to all Registrars and authorized AuDA resellers, to give all and sundry a chance to bid at fair market value, conducted by a government accredited Auction House or Auctioneer. C) The Highest bidder gets the domain, and the proceeds get split 50/50 Auda and loosing registrant, plus a processing fee for wasting AuDA's time. (Whichever is greater). That should even appease all of the Capitalism nuts on the list. > I'd have to agree with that. AuDA have shown by their actions (generic > name auctions etc) and by their words (the transfers policy I referred to > earlier) that in a practical sense at least, a domain name licence is a > transferrable asset. As long as the eligibility criteria are met by the > new registrant, I can see no public policy gain from restricting the > trading > of domain name licences. There is, on the other hand, a demonstrable > public > policy gain from freeing up Australian businesses to acquire and dispose > of domain name licences as they would any other business asset. Abuse of > this process would then be dealt with under the terms of the Trade > Practices > Act, as it is for other industries. > I think it's also important to make the point that legitimising the > secondary > market does not necessarily equal "turning .au into .com". While the eligibility > criteria remain in place, the .au domain space will always retain a degree > of value for Australian businesses that other spaces never will. > Jon >-- Original Message -- >From: "Charlie McCormack" <charlie§mccormack.net.au> >To: "'.au DNS Discussion List'" <dns§dotau.org> >Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 13:19:17 +1000 >Subject: Re: [DNS] Secondary Market >Reply-To: ".au DNS Discussion List" <dns§dotau.org> > > >> auDA made the >> decision about selling/auctioning domains. > >It could be argued they are selling Intellectual Property they have no right >to. > >If the amount a domain name holder is charged is an administration fee and >not as stated a sale price or auction price, then it would seem that auDA >are only an administrator of the DNS (as stated by ICANN) and not a provider >(merchant) of the DNS. > >So then don't they only administer a records system, which they charge an >administration fee, which then means they also have no rights to these >domain names, so then aren't the restrictions illegal, and could they be >infringing on IP laws or other trade laws? > >Which then comes back to the question Tony asked. > >So, they have the right to delegate authority to a domain name under the >administration of the DNS, but do they have the right to restrict the >resale. > >IMO, no they do not have this right of restriction as an administrator, it >would seem the only ones that could really apply this restriction is the >Australian Government. > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dns-bounces+charlie=mccormack.net.au§dotau.org [mailto:dns- >> bounces+charlie=mccormack.net.au§dotau.org] On Behalf Of Robert Sandali >> Sent: Tuesday, 18 July 2006 12:07 PM >> To: .au DNS Discussion List >> Subject: Re: [DNS] Secondary Market >> >> On behalf of the Government ? No, they are not a Government agency and >> don't act on behalf of the Government. Unless I am mistaken auDA made >the >> decision about selling/auctioning domains. >> >> Robert >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dns-bounces+robert.sandali=intaserve.com§dotau.org >> [mailto:dns-bounces+robert.sandali=intaserve.com§dotau.org]On Behalf Of >> Sean K. Finn >> Sent: Tuesday, 18 July 2006 11:40 >> To: .au DNS Discussion List >> Subject: Re: [DNS] Secondary Market >> >> >> Auda has done it on behalf of the Australian Government, have they not? >> >> Same rules as agents should apply. >> >> Complain to the source, don't kill the messenger. >> >> -Sean. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dns-bounces+sean.finn=ozservers.com.au§dotau.org >> [mailto:dns-bounces+sean.finn=ozservers.com.au§dotau.org] On Behalf Of >> Robert Sandali >> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 10:56 AM >> To: .au DNS Discussion List >> Subject: Re: [DNS] Secondary Market >> >> Are you asking whether a domain name is an asset, or why can auDA sell >> and >> auction domain names but the rest of the industry cannot ? >> >> Robert >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dns-bounces+robert.sandali=intaserve.com§dotau.org >> [mailto:dns-bounces+robert.sandali=intaserve.com§dotau.org]On Behalf Of >> tony§cmon.com.au >> Sent: Tuesday, 18 July 2006 09:11 >> To: .au DNS Discussion List >> Cc: .au DNS Discussion List >> Subject: Re: [DNS] Secondary Market >> >> >> >> Fact: AuDA has in the past "sold" "Auctioned" and otherwise derived an >> amount/s of significate magnitute for .com.au etc tese names are >> considered by the australian tax office as assets of a business or >> company. These "licences/assets" assist business organisations in >> promoting and providing productivity for same. >> >> My Simple question to AuDa is on what premise do they restrict the free >> commercial trading of that licence/asset. >> >> Can Auda provide a valid reason under law as to why they have >> restrictive >> mandates in relation to the .au domain space. >> >> Tony >> >> >> >>For capitalism to work .com.au >> >>needs to be something that's ownable. >> >> >> >>Its not ownable for good reason. >> > >> > A domain name may not be "ownable" or an "asset" however a domain name >> > licence >> > most certainly is. As the auDA transfer policy states: >> > >> > (http://auda.org.au/policies/auda-2004-03/) >> > <snip> >> > 3. CIRCUMSTANCES OF TRANSFER >> > >> > 3.1 A registrant may transfer their domain name licence to a proposed >> new >> > registrant if: >> > >> > a) (i) the registrant sells part or all of their business operations >> or >> > assets to the proposed new registrant, and the Deed of Sale includes >> the >> > transfer of the domain name licence; or >> > </snip> >> > >> > ie - a domain name licence can be included on a deed of sale and is >> > therefore >> > an asset of a business. >> > >> > Jon >> > >> > >> >>-- Original Message -- >> >>Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:58:31 +1000 >> >>From: "Sean K. Finn" <Sean.Finn§ozservers.com.au> >> >>To: ".au DNS Discussion List" <dns§dotau.org> >> >>Subject: Re: [DNS] Secondary Market >> >>Reply-To: ".au DNS Discussion List" <dns§dotau.org> >> >> >> >> >> >>> oh god. why is it that some people who claim to have no objection to >> >>> capitalism, display a total ignorance of its underlying philosophy? >> >> >> >>> Vic >> >> >> >>I'll Keep it short. >> >>http://celebratecapitalism.org/bernsteindeclaration/english/index.html >> >>and >> >>http://celebratecapitalism.org >> >>and slightly amusing: >> >>http://celebratecapitalism.org/graphics/prodosilovecapitalism.jpg >> >> >> >>Summary: >> >>" Capitalism is the only system based on the recognition that each >> >>individual owns his life. Capitalism is the only social system in >> which >> >>individuals are free to pursue their rational self-interest, to own >> >>property and to profit from their actions. It entrenches individual >> >>rights, limited Constitutional government, and >> >>political/intellectual/economic freedom." >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Hi Vic, >> >> >> >>You shouldn't beat yourself up so much. For capitalism to work .com.au >> >>needs to be something that's ownable. >> >> >> >>Its not ownable for good reason. >> >> >> >>Move On. >> >> >> >>-Sean. >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ----Received on Tue Jul 18 2006 - 08:29:19 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:08 UTC
