Had a few letters about wildcarding on some of our 2 letter domains.

It appears Namedrive by allowing xyz.somedomain.com.au to resolve breaches auDA policy. Have tried to establish precisely what we need to do to avoid this breach but getting no (useful) response.

Also they deleted a 3-letter domain from me last week due to

As many of you would understand, for a non-word 3-letter domain, satisfying this clause can often be difficult.

so beware....

__________________
CocktailRecipes.com.au ★ Photographers.com.au ★ DebitCard.com.au ★ Hockey.com.au ★ Boxing.com.au ★ DomainName.com.au

Hmm, it seems you got the raw end of the deal there, that is pretty frustrating to having a 3 letter domain deleted for the content issue. How can having un-relevant content be breaking policy, but having a parking page be perfectly legitimate?

Well I guess the theory is that if you park shoes.com.au, say, all the ads are going to be shoe-related so the content is relevant.

With three letter names though it gets a bit tricky. Say you have qxf.com.au, you will struggle to find ads that are relevant to the term 'qxf'. Similarly there are thousands of domains which are unresolved. If auDA take this 3-letter one from me then shouldn't they do the same for EVERY unresolved .au domain name? After all no content is certainly not relevant. A can of worms as I told them....

The interesting thing is why they have targeted this one in particular. My theory is that a 3rd party had interest in it and considered that contacting auDA and attempting a kind of 'reverse domain hijack' would be the most cost effective way.

If so, then it's completely at odds with their clear policies stating that only the auDRP can be used for .au domain disputes....

__________________
CocktailRecipes.com.au ★ Photographers.com.au ★ DebitCard.com.au ★ Hockey.com.au ★ Boxing.com.au ★ DomainName.com.au

Netfleet,

Unresolved domains aren't monetised therefore don't need content, let alone relevant content.