Adrian

The short answer is "Yes", a lottery style system was considered by the Name
Policy Advisory Panel ... so were other methods of allocation - tenders,
FCFS and auctions.

See my co-authored contributions to Panel reports at:

- Final Report (Attachment B) to auDA Board
<http://www.auda.org.au/docs/auda-name-eligibility-final.html#ATTB>.

- Proposed changes to domain name eligibility and allocation policies in the
.au domain space: Public Consultation Report, Nov 2000
<http://www.auda.org.au/docs/auda-name-eligibility-pcr1.html>.
See references to "auction" on this page.  Reproduced as Endnote 1 below for
ease of reference.

My preferred approach was a "gateway" approach for generic names in com.au
that hadn't already slipped through the net.  I couldn't get much support
for this approach within the Panel.  See the SETEL submission for more on
gateways <http://www.setel.com.au/publications/public/subs/055.htm>.

In the Final Report (similar earlier working papers) I wrote:
<http://www.auda.org.au/docs/auda-name-eligibility-final.html#ATTB>:

<quote>

Alternative approach

The Panel could recommend that auDA engage a professional consultant or
merchant banker to undertake a scoping study and public discussion paper to
more fully investigate in the issues considered in this paper.

A discussion paper would be based on a study to scope the development and
implementation of an appropriate gateway system model, probably a
market-based one, for the allocation of generic and geographic domain name
licences, which is in the public interest and accords with auDA
Constitution.

The issues to be considered include: .........  What rights and obligations
should be conferred on an applicant that is allocated a generic ... domain
name licence under any tender or auctions system?  Are there any grounds for
restricting or otherwise regulating the trading of domain names that are
allocated via market-based means?

</quote>

Some of these issues still need to be addressed.

Why?  Well, the amount a bidder is prepared to bid for a domain name licence
at auction seems likely to depend upon, for example, the perceived risks of
loosing it in subsequent legal action, say, involving a trade mark owner or
an applicant for a trade mark.  If you knew you were bidding against such a
person, perhaps you would have second thoughts or at least discount what you
might otherwise be prepared to pay.

Regards


Ian

~~~~~
Ian Johnston
Candidate for the auDA Board
www.infobrokers.com.au/resume
Member, Name Policy Advisory Panel
Member, Competition Model Advisory Panel
mailto:ian.johnston&#167;infobrokers.com.au

~~~~~
Endnote 1
Source: <http://www.auda.org.au/docs/auda-name-eligibility-pcr1.html>

Issue 4.2.2: Licensing of generic and geographic domain names

The Panel considered the alternative view to that put as Proposal 4.2.1 - to
relax or abolish the policy prohibiting the licensing of generic and
geographic domain names, having regard to community expectations, the
interest of users and businesses and others wanting access to these domain
names.

The Panel has not included objectionable names in this proposal, as it is
presumed that a prohibition on objectionable domain names would continue to
apply on public policy grounds that are well developed in broadcasting and
other public domains. However, comment is invited on this matter.

The Panel noted that generic and geographic names can be regarded as public
assets that should be managed in the public interest. In this context, the
Panel considered the concept of gateways and other structured approaches to
the use of generic and geographic names (refer to section 4.3).

The Panel also noted that quite different cases could be made out for
generic and geographic names respectively.

Permitting generic names in open 2LDs would involve major transition issues,
including in particular issues of allocation. The Panel considered a number
of methods of allocation of generic and geographic domain name licences
having regard to the rationale for sustaining the existing policy of
prohibition. The following methods of allocation might be used. [10] In the
light of public responses, the Panel may move further forward with Proposal
4.2.2, and a paper will be developed on these matters.

First come, first served: generic/geographic domain names are licensed to
applicants on a first-come, first-served basis.

Lotteries: lotteries are a competitively neutral and non-discriminatory
method of allocating domain names licences, and involve applying a chance
generator to determine the allocation of a domain name licence.

Tenders: two kinds of tenders may be used to allocate generic and geographic
domain name licences - highest bid tenders, and 'beauty contests'; in the
latter, the monetary bid is only one of the factors considered in assessing
the tender.

Auctions: auctions would involve competitive price bidding for generic and
geographic names.

Proposal 4.2.2:

Relax the current policy and enable licensing of generic and geographic
domain names using an appropriate licence allocation system, such as a
market-based one.

Pros of Proposal 4.2.2:

The proposal would address significant issues and problems with the current
policy of prohibiting generic and geographic domain names, in particular the
fact that the current policy is inconsistent across commercial domains.

Users and business wanting to access generic and geographic names because
they are, easily remembered, intuitive, meaningful, well known or easily
recognisable, would be able to do so.
The proposal would address the misallocation of scarce and valuable generic
and geographic domain names and enable the efficient and economic use of
intrinsically valuable .au DNS.

The proposal potentially enables the allocation of over 240,000 geographic
names, thus providing e-commerce gateways for local businesses and services,
particularly in regional and rural Australia
The proposal would enable Internet users, for their own good reasons, to
access generic and geographic domain names with useful and important
information (eg. www.information.com.au, www.dinner.com.au,
www.health.com.au, www.safety.com.au.

Some forms of the proposal would enable auDA to diversify its funding base
and to provide additional funding for its core activities in administering
the .au domain system.

Cons of Proposal 4.2.2:

A case is set out above, in relation to Proposal 4.2.1, for the retention of
the existing policy.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brown [mailto:abrown&#167;golook.com.au]
> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 5:17 PM
> To: dns&#167;auda.org.au
> Subject: Fw: [DNS] Domain Names and Trade Marks
>
>
> It is very interesting proposal.
> He with the deepest pockets wins.
> Does anyone know if a lottery style system was considered.
>
> >Ian Johnson Wrote:
> > From auDA Board Meeting Minutes of 13 August 2001
> >
> > The board agreed to adopt the following method of allocation of generic
> > domain names:
> >
> > 1. Publish list of names refused by Melbourne IT because deemed to be
> > generic. The list will be closed shortly before publication.
> >
> > 2. Advertise a 14 day period during which an interest in a name can be
> > registered.
> >
> > 3. Interested parties must complete an application form to demonstrate
> > that as at 13 August 2001, they were eligible to hold the name under the
new
> > policy rules.
> >
> > 4. At the end of the 14 day period, auDA will assess the applications
> > received. There are 3 scenarios:
> >
> > a. If there is only one eligible applicant for a name, that applicant
may
> > reserve the name by paying a fixed price (eg. $100) to auDA. The
applicant
> > will be able to register the name under the new regime for the normal
retail
> > price.
> >
> > OR
> >
> > b. If there is more than one eligible applicant for a name, those
applicants
> > may proceed to a closed auction for the name. The winner of the auction
> > may reserve the name by paying the amount bid to auDA. The winner will
> > be able to register the name under the new regime for the normal retail
price.
> >
> > OR
> >
> > c. If there are no eligible applicants for a name, the name will become
> > available for registration under the new regime on a first come, first
> > served basis.
> >
> > Note that the generic domain names will be registered by registrars, not
> > by auDA. auDA will receive the proceeds of the auction, it will not
receive
> > payment for generic domain names when they are registered after the
auction.
> >
> > The board decided that while the list of generic domain names will
remain
> > open until shortly before the auction, applicants for generic domain
names
> > should be eligible to hold the name as at 13 August 2001.
> >
> > This will minimise the opportunity for people to register business names
> > solely for the purpose of registering generic domain names. This is
intended
> > as a measure of protection for those people who have applied for names
in
> > the past and would otherwise have been eligible to hold them but for the
> > restriction on generics. ER voted against this decision.
> >
> > Action: auDA staff to further develop the implementation plan for the
> > auction of generic names, including the technical means and cost of
> > conducting the auction.
> >
> > --
> > This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
> > express permission of the author. 322 subscribers.
> > Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns,
> pass: dns)
> > Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.
> >
>
> --
> This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
> express permission of the author. 324 subscribers.
> Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
> Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.

--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 324 subscribers. 
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.