] Josh wrote
] 
] >>>
] Have there been any legal precedents set (in Australia or OS) for getting
] your own name back from people like this:
] 
] http://www.australiapost.com/
] >>>>

I think there was a case brought recently by Melbourne IT against the
registrant of a .com domain, which they alleged was deceptively similar
to one of their business names.

] What do you mean your name? This site looks quite established. As an
] information/news site there is a long tradition of using "post" as part of
] a  title i.e. the Washington Post being a case in point.  (A very old
] tradition)
] 
] There is no use grumbling over Australia Post's  lack of initiative in
] getting the name earlier. The fairest question (and good luck to the
] current owner) is how much you are prepared to pay to protect your
] branding.

] It seems to me that some people actually want to reward those who are too
] slow, ignorant or timid to get on the net early. What a lovely thought.

I think this analysis is a bit simplistic.

Australia Post have had a domain name for many years (auspost.com.au).
It seems what you are really saying is that businesses should not only
register the name they want to use, but register their name in lots of
other domains, and variations on their name, so that no one else can
register it also.

I find this a fundamentally flawed world view (although its good for
registries/registrars to have businesses registering their name in many
countries, so I can't imagine NSI having any problems with it at all).

Fortunately in com.au we have some protection against this kind of thing.
At least someone wanting to register australiapost.com.au would need
to have a registered business name (or better) on which to base their
application.
__________________________________________________________________________
 David Keegel <djk&#167;cyber.com.au>  URL: http://www.cyber.com.au/users/djk/
Cybersource P/L: Unix Systems Administration and TCP/IP network management