The substance of this seems like a step forward in that it focuses
attention on the immediate priority: .com.au  through which experience
will be gained, we'll have running code etc etc..

mark.hughes§ccamatil.com wrote:

> 1. General statement of what the 2LD is about and how it is
> administered.
> 2. Criteria for annual license renewal
> 3. Criteria for new DNA licenses
> 4. Code of Practice
> 5. 2LD name allocation policy

How about adding:
6. License Terms
7. Dispute resolution policy.
...both shamelessly lifted from the .com.au new general policy.

Concerning (7), input from MelbourneIT would be valuable on how
successful feels it's dispute resolution policy has been or what
arrangements ADNA would need to make with the Australian Commercial
Disputes Centre in order to implement this policy.  I do think *some*
sort of policy is needed and that it should be common to DNA activities
within a given domain in order to ensure public confidence.

Other questions:
- who's responsible if a mistake made by the central registry
   is the cause of the dispute?
- at what point should ADNA become involved in disputes, if at all?

6. License Terms
The domain name licence is non-transferrable.
The domain name licence may be revoked:

- when a prescribed fee is not paid
- for breach of an applicant warranty (for example, for misleading or
   incorrect information on the application form)
- where a court of competent authority determines that the domain name
  should not be allocated to the applicant, or should be allocated to
another party
- where the commercial entity which owns the domain name ceases to
exist, or the licence to use the company or
   business (or other) name is revoked or lapses
- where the commercial entity which owns the domain name changes its
name; or
- where instructed by the current licensee of the domain name

If a domain name licence is revoked, the name will remain dormant for a
period of three months. During this period the original licensee may
address the issue which led to the revocation of the domain name
licence. After this period, the domain name will cease to be allocated
and can be applied for by another party.

In the case of a dispute with the DNA, the disputant(s) agrees to submit
to and be bound by the dispute resolution process outlined here. This
dispute resolution process provides for mediation and resolution by an
industry-accepted arbitration process.

7. Dispute resolution policy.

The dispute resolution process is:
1.The originator of the dispute notifies the DNA that there is
   a dispute.
2.The originator, the Bureau and any third parties must attempt
   to settle the dispute by negotiation and conciliation; and
3.If the dispute is not settled by negotiation or conciliation,
   the dispute is referred to the Australian Commercial Disputes
   Centre. All parties agree to be bound by the ruling of the arbiter.

> 2.2 DNAs must pay annual renewal fees as set from time to time by
> ADNA.  The fee for 1997/1998 is set at  $.25c per .com.au domain
> name registered by the DNA.

ADNA would have made 2000 * .25 = $500 last month from .com.au.  Seems
like it's a reasonable amount for for administration but not enough to
carry out any megalomaniacal plans.

5.2 INCLUSIONS

> Any legal entity which is a commercial entity that trades in
> Australia can register a COM.AU domain name.  For the purposes of
> this policy a commercial entity is considered to be one that exists
> to make a profit.  Examples include companies, statutory
> corporations or authorities, incorporated associations, partnerships
> and sole traders.

There must be dozens of special cases here.  Can it be simplified to
become deterministic: eg. Any legal entity that operates in Australia
that is not a non-profit organisation under the tax code?

> 5.4.6 Not be a generic word describing products (goods or services),
> industries, industry sectors, or organisations.  Examples of
> unacceptable domain names include: beer (product), banking
> (industry), industrial (industry), company (organisation type).
> Generic phrases comprising of two or more generic words are allowed.

This is a weak spot in terms of making the rules deterministic and
automating it might be non-trivial.  Seems like one would need to start
with a dictionary of words and then add some sort of algorithm for
plurals, tenses, conjugation and then it still wouldn't be as good as a
human.  Perhaps we could just agree on the dictionary?

Leni.