1. Welcome to DNTrade. If you want to find out about the latest domain name industry news or talk, share, learn, buy, sell, trade or develop domain names - then you've come to the right place. It's a diverse and active community, with domain investors, web developers and online marketers - and it's free! Click here to join now.
    Dismiss Notice

Have Your Say — Direct Registration

Discussion in 'Domain News' started by neddy, Oct 3, 2017.

  1. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    1,156
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    The 2017 Policy Review Panel has today released an issues paper which they invite your comments on. Full details here.

    There is no survey - if you want to comment, you need to do a written submission on the issues by email or post. Your can comment on all or some of the issues. The deadline is the 10th November (about 5 weeks from today).

    Your comments are vital, so if you feel strongly about direct registration, you need to speak up. Remember there will be at least two public consultations. Submissions are what will sway the ultimate decision making process. Just remember what happened with Nominet!

    This is the full announcement on the auDA website:

    Public submissions are now open for the first phase of the Policy Review Panel's work, the development of an implementation policy for Direct Registration. This substantial policy change will allow Australian internet users the choice to register a domain name directly before the dot in .au, for example, yourname.au


    The Policy Review Panel invites you to have your say on the issues and options presented in the issues paper for the implementation of second level domain registrations.


    The Panel invites written submissions by close of business on Friday 10 November, 2017. Submissions can be emailed to policy.review@auda.org.au or by post to:


    Policy Review Panel
    C/O .au Domain Administration
    PO Box 18315
    Melbourne VIC 3001
     
  2. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,533
    Likes Received:
    1,804
    Cheers Ned, have made a submission.
     
    neddy likes this.
  3. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    1,156
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Just for the record, please note my disclaimer here:

    ♦ I am a member of this Policy Review Panel (PRP), and have given my commitment as to the confidentiality of the process. Therefore, whilst you are welcome to make comments, I will not be doing so!

    ♦ Please note that there will be Minutes published of each PRP meeting. As this is an independent panel, these should be fairly prompt compared to what one normally expects with auDA! ;)

    Article also on Domainer today.
     
  4. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,533
    Likes Received:
    1,804
    I would suggest people ignore the stuff about "The Panel is not revisiting the merits of direct registration." and use this as an opportunity to tell AUDA loud and clear your viewpoint on whether direct registrations should be brought in or not.
     
    johno69 and DomainNames like this.
  5. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    1,156
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    To make it easier for everyone on here, these are the actual questions or issues:

    The Questions

    1. What date should be chosen as the cut-off date for determining registrant eligibility for priority registration of the second level domain name, and why?

    2. Should registrants of domain names at the fourth level within edu.au and gov.au be eligible for priority registration? If so, what rules should apply?

    3. What process should be implemented to resolve competing claims to the same .au name and why? Should registrants whose claim is unsuccessful be given priority to register another second level domain name?

    4. How much time should priority registrants have to exercise their right to register the matching second level name before it is made available to the public for registration?

    5. Should certain names be reserved for future use as 2LDs? Please indicate which names and why they should be reserved as future 2LDs?

    6. Are there names whose use is not prohibited at law that should be reserved?

    7. Should names that are potentially confusing or misleading when registered at the second level be reserved (ie not available for registration)?

    8. Should names that are a deliberate misspelling of the existing 2LDs be prohibited from being registered at the second level?

    9. Should direct registration be implemented in .au using a staged process or concurrent reservation and open availability process, and why?

    10. Should other registrants or rights holders be given priority during the landrush or reservation period to register a second level domain name (trademark owners)?​

    How To Make A Submission

    You don’t have to comment on every single issue or question if you don’t want to – just comment on what’s important to you.

    Submissions can be emailed to policy.review@auda.org.au
     
    Scott7 likes this.
  6. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    1,156
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    Unlike auDA, the PRP gets its Minutes out quickly. ;) You can read them here.

    My comments / point of view are reflected in Clause 1.(3) - and again in Clause 6 on top of page 3.

    Ned
     
  7. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,236
    Likes Received:
    516
    100% spot on. Tell them NO sorry. Stick to the budget you have now or contact all 3 millions domain name registrants and the many who paid auDA $ millions for their .com.au names.

    Although some people are keen to keep trying to push this through it could come back to bite them badly if it all goes legal.... especially if they where involved in any questionable yes only vote stacking campaigns or have "conflicts of interest" and major financial gains to be had.

    FYI was Realestate.net.au registered before Realestate.com.au. What do you think RealEstate.com.au will do...

    This is about some parties wanting to make more money auDA, Ausregistry / Neustar/ Golden Gate ( 100% foreign owned?), Melbourne IT and all of their entities, some board members who may get bonuses or some form of gain? Where are all of the disclosures?

    auDA has $10 million in the bank still from profits.... yest some are pushing this as another easy money making plan..

    How does the auDA CEO's performance bonus get calculated? Is it is tied to profits, numbers of names registered or what? This also may need some public listing on the auDA website along with the Board possible conflicts of interest etc.

    There is money pushing this from behind the scenes to ram it through.. FOLLOW THE MONEY the auDA CEO told me and several board members.
     
    snoopy likes this.
  8. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,236
    Likes Received:
    516
    Everyone needs to read this and ask why auDA and the auDA Board ignore such feedback.
    [​IMG]

    http://accan.org.au/our-work/submissions/1109-direct-registrations-submission
    Should .au be open to direct registrations?
    Released: 04 June 2015
    .au Domain Administration (auDA) invited comment on a public issues paper about the way .au domain names are allocated and used. The paper has been prepared by a Names Policy Panel consisting of nominated members of the Australian Internet community who have expressed interest in helping shape policy for the .au domain space.

    The major issue being considered by the panel is whether auDA should allow second level direct registration of domain names under .au (eg. myname.au), something that is recently available in New Zealand (.nz) and the United Kingdom (.uk), among other countries.

    Download: [​IMG]auDA Domain Names submission.docx94.95 KB

    Download: [​IMG]auDA Domain Names submission.pdf324.35 KB

    http://accan.org.au/our-work/submissions/1110-direct-registrations-draft-recommendations-submission

    Should .au be open to direct registrations? Draft Recommendations
    Released: 30 September 2015
    The administrator of the .au domain space, .au Domain Administration Ltd (auDA), established a Panel of stakeholders to review the major Australian domain name policies and invited interested stakeholders to submit on in April 2015. This submission is in response to the latest round of consultation on the Draft Recommendations of the Panel.

    The main recommendation is that, in principle, Australians should be able to register domain names directly under .au (eg. myname.au). This has never been possible before – all domain names are registered under second level domains (2LDs) for specific purposes (eg. myname.com.au for commercial entities). The proposed change would leave the existing 2LDs in place, and also add the option of registering directly for any Australian entity or individual.

    Download [​IMG]auDA Domain Names_Draft Recommendations Response Sept 2015.docx94.12 KB

    Download [​IMG]auDA Domain Names_Draft Recommendations Response Sept 2015.pdf361.25 KB


    [​IMG]
    "For immediate release 27 November, 2015
    " ACCAN voices concern over proposed changes to domain name system

    The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) has written to the .au Domain Administration (auDA) Board to voice concerns over the proposed changes to the Australian domain name system. auDA is proposing to introduce a .au environment without the need for .com, .net, .edu and so on. The proposed change will allow for domain names like “www.accan.au” to be registered.

    Australia’s current domain name system is highly regarded and has strong public recognition. The proposed changes could have adverse effects on small businesses that rely on their website and domain name to attract business if other parties register and use similar domain names. It could also result in additional expenses incurred by small businesses that have to defensively register additional domain names to protect their businesses. The changes may be confusing to consumers as recognised domain names of businesses and organisations could change. ACCAN has previously voiced these concerns in two separate submissions in June and September.
    “ACCAN has consulted with a number of small businesses who have expressed concern over the proposed changes to Australian domain names,” said ACCAN CEO, Teresa Corbin. “There is a strong likelihood that small businesses will incur extra costs due to defensive registrations, not to mention the extra time and effort they’ll need to spend ensuring their domain name and business are protected.

    “We are concerned that to date feedback on the changes has largely been from the domain name industry and the consultation has not adequately taken into account other perspectives such as those of small businesses. A lot of small businesses may not even be aware of the proposed changes,” said Ms Corbin...........................

    For more information, contact Luke Sutton on luke.sutton@accan.org.au or 0409 966 931.

    MEDIA CONTACT
    Luke Sutton
    Mobile: 0409 966 931 luke.sutton@accan.org.au Phone: 02 9288 4017

    TTY: 02 9281 5322

    The Australian Communications Consumer Action Network (ACCAN) is Australia’s peak communications consumer organisation. The operation of ACCAN is made possible by funding provided by the Commonwealth of Australia under section 593 of the Telecommunications Act 1997. This funding is recovered from charges on telecommunications carriers."
     
  9. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,236
    Likes Received:
    516
    https://auda.org.au/assets/Uploads/auda-prp-minutes-20170927.pdf
    "Ned O’Meara reiterated his position that the merits of direct registration needed to be considered alongside implementation.

    He queried the cost to existing registrants if they had to defensively register domains; and if they did so, how there could be real or actual growth in the .au space?

    He raised the issue of the Deloitte report being commissioned to see if there was a “business case” for direct registrations. This has not been released to members.

    John Swinson noted that it was open to the Panel to tell the auDA Board that, as a practical matter, direct registration could not be implemented. However, it is the role of the Panel and the first task to determine how best to implement direct registration."
     

    Attached Files:

  10. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,236
    Likes Received:
    516
    Get ready for a class action lawsuit?.... millions of existing .com.au owners, small and large businesses ... once they are contacted will be a major force to contend with backed by the right law firm and litigation lender..
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_action
    Australia and New Zealand
    Class actions became part of the Australian legal landscape only when the Federal Parliament amended the Federal Court of Australia Act1 ("the FCAA") in 1992 to introduce the "representative proceedings", the equivalent of the American "class actions".[30] Likewise, class actions appeared slowly in New Zealand legal system. However, a group can bring litigation through the action of a representative under the High Court Rules which provide that one or a multitude of persons may sue on behalf of, or for the benefit of, all persons "with the same interest in the subject matter of a proceeding". The presence and expansion of litigation funders have been playing a significant role in the emergence of class actions in New Zealand. For example, the "Fair Play on Fees" proceedings in relation to penalty fees charged by banks was funded by Litigation Lending Services (LLS), a company specializing in the funding and management of litigation in Australia and New Zealand. It was the biggest class action suit in New Zealand history.[31][32]

    http://www.litigationlending.com.au/
    http://www.litigationlending.com.au/what-we-do.html
     
  11. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,236
    Likes Received:
    516
    If those parties who bought names at the auDA .com.au auction are affected they would possibly have a case... Has auDA contacted them all to really inform them of the proposed competing .au and if they wil get the rights to the direct au, what it will cost etc? Why not?

    How about all those thousands of people who bought names on the drop auctions? Did auDA contact them and explain how their investment may be affected?

    Our Reputation
    [​IMG]
    “Litigation Lending is very commercial and understands complex legal scenarios. They make sensible and quick decisions and are very easy to work with.”

    David Lombe
    Restructuring Services - Partner, Deloitte Financial Advisory

    [​IMG]
    "The Turnaround & Insolvency team at RSM Bird Cameron has worked with Litigation Lending on a number of cases over a number of years and have found them to be a valuable and important part of the team. Their people are accessible, responsive and very commercial in dealing with difficult and complex matters. This has contributed greatly towards achieving substantial returns to creditors."

    Peter Marsden
    Partner, RSM Bird Cameron

    [​IMG]
    "As an Insolvency Practitioner, I have had a long association with Litigation Lending, having used their service capabilities on many occasions including some quite difficult litigation. They are an organisation that I believe must be considered by any practitioner needing litigation funding capabilities and resources"

    Paul Weston
    Partner, Pitcher Partners

    [​IMG]
    "For more than 10 years I have counted Litigation Lending as an invaluable partner in litigation. Their high level of technical competence, responsive and commercial attitude, and personable approach have driven successful outcomes for my clients time and time again."

    Luke Whiffen
    NSW Insolvency - National Manager, Shine Lawyers

    [​IMG]
    “Having worked with Litigation Lending over a number of years, I’ve always found them to be easy to deal with and very commercial. They are also flexible in adapting their funding arrangements to meet clients’ needs, and work collaboratively with the legal team.”

    Matt Hourn
    Lawyer Director, Neville & Hourn Legal"
     
  12. neddy

    neddy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,696
    Likes Received:
    1,156
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    There is only one "Official Score Board", and that is the Policy Review Panel. There can be 1000 + posts on DNT, Domainer and other social media, but that means next to nothing.

    Everyone with a point of view on the issues raised needs to be "on the record". Get your submissions in asap. One thing I have learnt over the years is that submissions encourage further submissions!
     
    snoopy, DomainNames and findtim like this.
  13. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,236
    Likes Received:
    516
    Ned very proud of you for having your say on the record and the public meeting minutes.

    It is obvious some people are still trying to push the Policy Review Panel that this is a done deal and to toe the line when in fact it is not a done deal and there are ways for it to not proceed.
     
    eBranding.com.au and snoopy like this.
  14. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,533
    Likes Received:
    1,804
    Here is my submission,

    Screen Shot 2017-10-13 at 11.16.10 am.png
     

    Attached Files:

    johno69, DomainNames and Bacon Farmer like this.
  15. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,236
    Likes Received:
    516
    auDA says it is "too costly and they do not have the resources" to contact the existing .au registrants including those they auctioned names off to years ago who will all be affected.

    This excuse by auDA and the auDA Board is pure Bullsh$$. 99.9 % of existing .au registrants have not been contacted and there is no use doing stupid ads. Email the existing .au database multiple times at least!

    With over $10 million in the bank do you think auDA has a responsibility under the auDA constitution to email multiple times at least the existing .au registrant database and
    1. Explain who auDA is
    2. Present all of the facts about the proposed competing extra .au extension
    3. Explain the possible extra costs for the existing registrant. Costs may include further IP protection, dispute costs, IT costs, SEO costs, Advertising etc
    4. The email to the existing .au database should have disclaimers how much auDA and the Wholesale registry will make from every proposed .au registered, renewed and change of registrant fee
    5. Show people the real stats from the .uk and .nz failure and include the factual statement from New Zealand peak body who runs it there that "many of the existing .co.nz who took up the .nz for defensive registrations only have since let the .nz drop"

    • What is auDA's and Ausregistry/ Neustar/ Golden Gate Capital foreign owners projected income increase from pushing in the extra .au for their own benefit?
    • Will any old or existing auDA Board members make any gains personally or for their companies?
    • Does the rumoured remaining $30 million payment related to the sale of Ausregistry have any relevance to anyone pushing to get it in or is that just rumoured to be related to if Ausregistry gets the wholesale registry contract again?
    • https://www.crn.com.au/news/118m-payday-for-melbourne-domain-name-firm-407350
    $118m payday for Melbourne domain name firm
     
    Bacon Farmer likes this.
  16. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,533
    Likes Received:
    1,804
    Update: AUDA is clearly angry at suggestions people should talk about the merits of .AU in their submissions and is now responding automatically to all responses with this, (I can confirm this is a completely different reponse to one week ago)

    I would strongly suggest that people disregard AUDA's advice and tell them exactly what you think of the of the .AU proposal. I choose to answer none of AUDA 12 questions because the merits of the proposal must be looked at rather than simply skipping to implementation.

    AUDA, where is the Deloitte report on .AU? Why won't you publish it?
     
    Bacon Farmer and DomainNames like this.
  17. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    681
    Likes Received:
    393
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    au Policy Review Panel - Minutes
    27st September 2017 at 10:00AM​
    upload_2017-10-13_14-11-47.png

    The CEO made it very clear.
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  18. Scott.L

    Scott.L Membership: Trader

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    681
    Likes Received:
    393
    auDA Member:
    Yes
    it puzzles me why the CEO would make that statement. Is the Board 100% agreeable? If so, where is the data (business case) to support that statement.

    SHOW ME THE MATH!
     
    DomainNames likes this.
  19. snoopy

    snoopy Membership: VIP

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2010
    Messages:
    4,533
    Likes Received:
    1,804
    Yes, just a few months ago he made contradictory comments at the Melbourne members meetup.

    This is the point at which AUDA attempts to disregard that its a damaging policy and just implement it anyway. I think that is why the Deloitte Report is being withheld from members, sweep the data and analysis under the rug, forget all the promises made about due diligence and research.
     
  20. DomainNames

    DomainNames Membership: Community

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2010
    Messages:
    2,236
    Likes Received:
    516
    That is in conflict with his statement made at the AGM!

    Time for Board Spill if the whole Board is committed and not wanting to do further stakeholder engagement.

    The existing and NEW board can overturn it. Don't be fooled.... auDA does want the extra $$$ an extra .au will give them to spend..