WOW ...if the following is true then talk about FALSE REPRESENTATION from
SOME or is it again the ONE ISP !!!

>Kim Davies wrote:
>> ...
>> As a sign of good faith, iiNet has decided not to pursue costs against
>> Melbourne IT for the court action.
>>
>In fact, the Federal Court gave Melbourne IT the opportunity to prepare
>a case for costs against iiNet, and not vice versa. At this stage iiNet
>had withdrawn its action, the Court had awarded Telstra's costs and
>KRE's costs (if any) against iiNet, and Melbourne IT's chances of
>winning costs were, in our view, quite significant. 
>
>However at the DNS Forum in Sydney on Friday 16 May, a few minutes
>before the start of the meeting, I took Michael Malone to one side and
>told him that, in a spirit of concilation, Melbourne IT had decided not
>to pursue costs against iiNet. Michael thanked me and shook my hand
>warmly and spontaneously.
>
>The new spirit of conciliation bore surprising fruit that same day, when
>MM unexpectedly nominated me for the position of interim Secretary of
>ADNA. I was as staggered and pleased as when at the previous DNS Forum
>Skeeve Stevens gave an unsolicited testimonial to Melbourne IT's
>excellent perfomance in processing com.au applications. 
> 
>I am therefore, as I said, a little disappointed that sorme-one in iiNet
>decided on Monday to try and extract sole credit for our rapprochement,
>by implying untruthfully that they were the initiator of the
>settlement.  
>
>On the other hand I do entirely agree with Michael Malone where Kim
>Davies has quoted him in their press release as saying: 
>>   "Both Melbourne IT and iiNet support the common goal of achieving fair
>>   competition in domain name registrations. We're pleased to put this
>>   court action behind us, and co-operate on the establishment of the
>>   Australian Domain Name Authority (ADNA)"
> 

Cheers, BK.