auDA Puts Domain In Pending Delete & Goes On Holidays

On the afternoon of Thu 17th, 2009 SAPIA Pty Ltd registered the domain name “stephenconroy.com.au” as a satirical platform on which to air grievances and promote debate about the Australian governments proposed mandatory Internet filtering scheme. By 5pm the next day, the website was forcibly taken offline by auDA.

SAPIA was given merely 3 hours to issue a response which is an unusually short period of time for domain eligibility complaints to be arbitrated. A request for additional time was denied personally by auDA’s CEO shortly before the domain was taken offline.

The domain name stephenconroy.com.au is now in PendingDelete and the auDA office is closed for the holiday season – Merry Christmas.

Meanwhile, Electronic Frontiers Australia has expressed its surprise and concern:

“This incident reflects worrying concerns about the power that private domain
name regulators have to silence critical political speech without going
through legitimate legal channels.”

SAPIA Pty Ltd appears to have re-established the site (out of the range of auDA’s jurisdiction / claws) at stephen-conroy.com (no more .au).

Just in case you don’t know what the fuss is all about regarding Internet censorship in Australia, have a look at this video:

More information is available at: PRWeb, Open Letters & EFA.

Aussie Regulator Targets Domainers

This afternoon I received an email from auDA (the “industry self-regulatory body for the .au domain space”) thanking me for my submission to the Domain Renewal, Expiry and Deletion Policy (2006-07). They kindly informed me that the outcome of the review had been published on their website.

What should concern every investor who buys .com.au are the comments that auDA made in relation to “unofficial drop lists”.

Here is the initial question posed by auDA back in August:

“What action (if any) auDA should take in relation to unofficial domain drop lists, and the domain-catching services being provided by some accredited registrars and other industry participants.”

Here is an extract from the “response to public comments“. I have highlighted particular areas of interest.

“Submissions that commented on this issue were roughly divided between those that argued for no action to be taken, and those that wanted to see this type of activity more directly managed or regulated by auDA.”

“In the latter category, 7 submissions supported the publication of an official domain drop list, and 3 submissions supported the introduction of a centrally managed domain release/auction process.”

auDA Response

“We note that many of the submissions that argued for no action to be taken on this issue came from people who currently provide or use domain-catching services. Other submissions pointed out that ordinary members of the public are not aware of, or do not have access to, these services and are therefore at a significant disadvantage. Our experience in handling complaints and inquiries from the public tends to support this view. We propose to publish an official, authoritative domain drop list. The list would be updated daily and would include the exact date and time that domain names will become available for registration. As with the previous issue, we believe this change would help to level the playing field. It would also help to avoid any confusion or uncertainty which may arise from unofficial drop lists.”

“We have given consideration to proposals that auDA take a more direct role in managing the release of expired and deleted domain names, for example through a centralised auction process. This would represent a major change to the Australian DNS which we do not believe is warranted at this time. Our expectation is that the publication of an official drop list will enable more registrars and other industry participants to offer drop-catching services, which will increase consumer awareness and choice.”

– ends –

So let me get this straight:

1. There were 35 submissions in total, and according to auDAs own statement, 7 supported the publication of a drop list. So the regulator is appearing to ignore the majority of submissions via public comment, and publish their own list anyway.

2. auDA says that “ordinary members of the public are not aware of, or do not have access to, these services and are therefore at a significant disadvantage.” How? Where is the evidence? Anyone can sign up to a drop catching service. How is this being significantly disadvantaged?

3. auDA claims that publishing their “official, authoritative domain drop list” would “help to level the playing field”. I personally believe that this will interfere with the operation of a free market.

4. As for auDA’s expectation that more registrars and other industry participants will “offer drop-catching services, which will increase consumer awareness and choice.” This statement clearly demonstrates complete ignorance of the .au marketplace and how it technically operates.

Looking into my crystal ball, I see:

* Registrars holding onto the domains registered (by users) with them;

* Other registrars (owned by the same company with multiple credentials) having a distinct advantage over the general public;

* Other companies getting into the drop catching business, thinking they can make a quick buck by promising to register a name at a particular time;

* The general public being under the illusion that they can hand register a .com.au that day at 3pm (or whenever the auDA decide the time is);

Its clear to me that we are seeing a bunch of bureaucrats desperately trying to keep themselves in a job, as opposed to letting a free market decide.

Domainer Nominates For auDA Board – Needs Your Help

auDA is the policy authority and industry self-regulatory body for the .au domain space. Its Annual General Meeting is to be held on 19 October 2009. The AGM will elect four directors to the board and I (Simon Johnson) have been nominated to stand for election by the Demand class members.

In order to vote, you must qualify under clause 16.1 of auDA’s constitution and your membership fee has to be paid.

You can read my candidate statement online; in summary, I stand for reform within auDA to increase transparency and the free-market commercialization of Australian namespace.

I know that some people think that having a Domainer on Board of auDA is unthinkable (and maybe an impossible task, in terms of getting elected). That’s why I’m asking for your help.

Please have a look through the auDA Members list and see if you know anyone in the Demand section. If you do, please contact them now and ask for them to vote for Simon Johnson. You can download my (already filled in) Proxy form here.

With your support, I’m hopeful that we can change the .au landscape for the better.

Australian Regulator To Review Domain Name Renewal, Expiry and Deletion

This afternoon I received an email from auDA requesting comment on their Domain Expiry, Renewal and Deletion Policy. auDA has specifically asked for comments around:

1. Whether the current 30 day pending delete period for expired domain names (ie. where the registrant has not renewed their domain name) is appropriate.
2. Whether the current “domain purge” procedure (ie. where domain names are purged from the registry at a random time between 10.30am and 5.00pm AEST on the next business day after the pending delete period ends) is effective.
3. What action (if any) auDA should take in relation to unofficial domain drop lists, and the domain-catching services being provided by some accredited registrars and other industry participants.

The closing date for submissions is Friday 11 September 2009. You can find all the submission details on the auDA web site.

OzBargain Typo Squatted – Diverts To eBay

Popular Australian bargain site, ozbargain.com.au has been typosquatted. That’s right – if you visit ozbargin.com.au (note that its missing an “a”) right now, the website diverts to eBay.

auDA has a “Prohibition on Misspellings Policy (2008-09)” which specifically states under section 4 “Scope of Prohibition”:

“4.1 The prohibition on misspellings applies where:

a) the domain name is a misspelling of an entity, personal or brand name that does not belong to the registrant; and

b) the registrant has deliberately registered the misspelling in order to trade on the reputation of the other entity, person or brand.

4.2 For the purposes of the prohibition, a domain name will be regarded as a misspelling if it falls into one of the following categories:

a) the singular version of a plural name, or the plural version of a singular name (eg. woolworth.com.au, safeways.com.au);

b) a name with missing letters (eg. yhoo.com.au);

c) a name with additional letters (eg. quantas.com.au);

d) a name with transposed letters (eg. goolge.com.au, wetspac.com.au);

e) a name with letters replaced by numbers, or numbers replaced by letters (eg. 9msn.com.au);

f) a hyphenated version of a name (eg. e-bay.com.au, micro-soft.com.au);

g) a name prefixed by “www” (eg. wwwseek.com.au); or

h) any other name that auDA determines is a deliberate misspelling, having regard to the surrounding circumstances.”

—

The ozbargin.com.au domain was last modified March 21, 2009; however its not known how long this has been going on for, nor how much the squatter has made in eBay affiliate sales (if any).

The company that owns ozbargin.com.au is YEE TECH PTY. LTD – ABN: 94102253734 registered in Baulkham Hills NSW.

A complaint has already been sent to auDA – lets see how long it takes them to act.

Happy Birthday Australia – .com.au Market Turns One!

Its been a year since auDA changed the rules to allow people to buy and sell Australian domains names.

So, what’s happened since then? My friends at Netfleet clocked up 30,000 domains, 1,500 offers and 105 transactions. Not bad when 99.9% of the population doesn’t understand the basic concept that you can buy/sell these things.

Just to put the icing on the cake; this week mortgage.net.au apparently sold for $13,500! I nearly fell off my chair when I read this – FOR A .NET.AU ? What the? Others include jeweller.com.au for $14,767 and freestuff.com.au for $18,700.

So, at least we are off to a start. It certainly wasn’t the big bang that people said it would be. Why am I not surprised? Despite being an Aussie, I personally haven’t been a fan of the .com.au namespace, but I am warming up to it….

Of course things would be better if the Australian government changed the backward, dysfunctional, judge, jury and executioner, “regulator” who is continuously in the media for all the wrong reasons, making Australia a complete joke on the world stage. Here are a few quotes from recent articles:

• Bolton dusts off for another courtroom scrap

“Cheyne Jonstone, of Cove Business Technology, has also called on Senator Conroy to sort out the mess….Senator Stephen Conroy needs to act now and act quickly. The government appointed this body to implement policy and regulate the .au domain name space, but their actions of late demonstrate that they are failing to do that adequately, or more importantly, the actions of their CEO, Chris Disspain.”

• Opinion: auDA recklessness damages Australian domain industry

“Larry Bloch, CEO and co-founder of Netregistry says Chris Disspain of auDA has acted as judge, jury and executioner by cancelling Bottle Domains’ accreditation so suddenly, here he talks to CRN about how this action is now proving to be grossly negligent.”

• Bottle Domains settlement talk scuttled as damages loom

“auDA chief Chris Disspain gave iTnews a categoric “no” when asked if the regulator would consider settling the case before it goes to trial on 24th June….. He also said the regulator had a strong enough cash position – some $4.3 million in reserves – to back up a further unfavourable ruling from the Victorian Supreme Court.”

Should auDA exist in its current form? Should there be protests at ICANN’s 35th meeting in Sydney this month, calling for the Australian government to step in, use their reserve powers in relation to domain names (under the Telecommunications Act 1997) and remove auDA? Perhaps transfer it to ACMA or another body, with more experience, that’s truly representative of the industry.

Post and let me know what you think.

Registrar sues auDA for deleting domain name

Domain Directors, an associated company of Instra Corporation, an auDA (Australian Domain Name Administrator) and ICANN accredited registrar, yesterday commenced legal proceedings in the Supreme Court of Queensland against auDA, the Australian domain name policy and regulatory body.

Last week, auDA unilaterally cancelled Domain Director’s domain name registration for auregistry.com.au. Domain Directors have owned and used the domain name auregistry.com.au for the past eight years.

Tony Lentino, the CEO of Domain Directors, said this afternoon:

I am shocked at auDA’s actions.  auDA brought down one of my long standing websites.  auDA wrote the policy, made the complaint to itself, and acted as judge and jury, and then deleted my DNS entry without informing me.  With auDA governing the system, no Australian domain name is safe.

Originally, auDA informed Domain Directors that a third party had made a complaint about the auregistry.com.au domain name, but after the lawsuit was commences, the lawyers for  auDA’s informed Domain Directors that in fact, no complaint had been made.

John Swinson, partner of Mallesons Stephen Jaques which is representing Domain Directors, says that the dispute will be heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland on Friday, 21 November.

Domain Directors is an international registrar and provides an extensive range of over 200 country code Top Level Domain name extensions across Europe, America, and the Asia Pacific regions.

About Domain Directors

Domain Directors is a global supplier in the Domain Name and ENUM industry, with its head office in Melbourne, and offices in New Zealand and China.

For more information about Domain Directors, and its associated company, Instra Corporation, please visit http://www.instra.com

For Media Enquiries, please contact: med...@instra.com

— ends —

Note: I received the above Press Release a few hours ago; I’m not in a position to check the facts around this case right now, but I’ll be asking auDA for comment this afternoon.

Chris Disspain on Monetization – Live from Traffic DownUnder 2008

Chris started off by correcting some statements made by previous speakers (ouch). He didn’t have any slides prepared and thanked a number of people, including an individual that persuaded him to come to the conference as he wasn’t going to attend. In my view it was probably not the best start to a presentation to an audience of 200+ domainers. However, he did clarify a list of common misconceptions about domainers and auDA. Apparently auDA like domainers! I think I need a cuddle.

Following on, there were a number of interesting statements made under the banner of “we don’t like”. For example:

• shoes.com.au – we expect a shoe site.
• we don’t like mis-spellings

Registrars as a monetizer – not comfortable with that. “You should make a choice between being a registrar and a domainer is not acceptable in our world.”

auDA is thinking about publishing a list of drop names. One to keep an eye on.

Adrian Kinderis, MD of AusRegistry – Live from Traffic DownUnder 2008

AusRegistry was co-founded in 2001. Since then its had substantial growth:

• 1 million .au names in November 2007
• 1 million .com.au names in June 2008
• Currently 1.25+ million .au names
• Average 25% annual growth

Adrian talked a LOT (in fact too much) about AusRegistry, explained some auDA policy around domain name monetization. For example, you can acquire a name if your primary business is to monetize. While there is no formal policy on domain tasting, there is a 3 day grace period.

Here is an interest graph of growth in the sector:

Personal comment: Given the low CPC rates and the population, I’d still question the viability of this space.

Erhan Karabardak from CooperMills Lawyers – Live from Traffic DownUnder 2008

Erhan introduced ICANN, auDA, IP Australia and other bodies before getting into their respective functions.

Issues With Regulation

• Most legal actions are initiated by small business
• Time taken to litigate can be a number of years

Key questions in seeking judicial review of  auDA’s decisions:

• auDA claims its not subject to Trade Practices Act. See Capital Networks Pty Ltd v .au Domain Administration Limited 2004 FCA 808
• auDA imposes a limitation of liability / exclusion in all domain name licenses.