> With regards to Submissions, I made all my submissions to auDA's
> previous  name - ADNA which shut down and later changed names to auDA.
> It's good to  see not much has changed since 1997.  (Maybe ask for the
> archives, surely  they still exist - I know I have them.)

There are archives, http://www.auda.org.au/archive/adna/

>>This is all well and good but I can see issues that can arise in the
>>fact that there are differing types of registarions within each state.
>>Using your example 'JOE BLOW' is a registered business in NSW, also JOE
>>BLOW is a registered charity in NSW and also a registered association.
>
> They can't use the SAME NAME.  Please do find ONE example of a Trade
> Name,  Charity and Association that all have the same name that are not
> made up of  the same board or partners.
>

Example

LITTLE COMPANY OF MARY 004224364
LITTLE COMPANY OF MARY (Registered charity.)

Who gets the name here... why should either be restricted to use LCM in
referring to their company?
Or

Should they be restricted to referring to there respective organisations as

LITTLECOMPANYOFMARY.nsw.au
LITTLECOMPANYOFMARY.org.au

What gives the business more right over the state name.

> All three registries are managed by the NSW Department of Fair Trading.
>  As  such, the data is contained in one register and only UNIQUE
> non-conflicting  names can be created.

There are similar names and I am presuming that you are suggesting that
the rules would mean that you have to get your full registered name
.nsw.au and you have no choice.
 NSW BN97760386 THE DOMAIN NAME MACYOURDAY
 NSW BN97762066 THE DOMAIN NAME MCD
 NSW U5604003 DOMAIN NAME SERVICES

I see no reason why all the three above have same right to use
domainnameservices.com.au or even nsw.au
> At any rate, an Association would register in ASN.AU and a charity in
> ORG.AU
>
> Right?
>
> So there is STILL no conflict (except assn's and charities across
> multiple  states, but come on, surely we have enough brain power to
> even solve that one?)

Well yes, but your now saying that asn's and org's that only run in NSW or
VIC have no rights to the nsw.au or vic.au names, when it can be seen very
clearly that they do.
>
>>Who has the right to the name, why does a business have more propritity
>>right to use the state name than an charity or even an association?
>
> That point is mute as noted above.
>

You may think that it's mute, when I can only see that your suggestion
outs us under lock and key, stifling, marketing, forward thinking business
plans and creative personal sites. We do not need to be told to the point
of no choice... choice is our right, internet a freedom and one that we
should not stagnate with a ball a chain to those who want to use it.
>> > Companies - that is those incorporated under Federal law -
>> > Corporations Law  - who have trade rights throughout the
>> > Commonwealth of Australia can  register in com.au which I guess
>> > means more "commonwealth.au" more than  commercial, right?
>>
>>This would only give companies an unfair advantage in the .com.au space
>>that directly relates to the .com space.
>
> No it doesn't.  Does having the phone number 12345678 give you an
> unfair  advantage over someone with 87654321?
>

Really it's a bad example because you can't have that number.

It can be said that it does matter though. Getting people to remember your
number is the key. Easier to see the 123... and recogonise what you saw
that backwards...
> Does having a fruit shop on the corner of Archer and Victoria Avenue
> have  some advantage over one in Chatswood Chase?
>

Don't know that area, but it can be said that a specific corner or peace
of real estate has a definite advantage over another. Some have more and
some have less.
> Does having the phone number (02) 8825 6111 give me more advantage over
>  someone with the phone number (03) 8825 6111?
>
> Lets get serious.  What newspaper do you buy?  SHM, Telegraph?  Which
> one  has the "unfair" advantage?
>
> What computer do you use?  PC or a Mac?  What operating system?
>
> We can go on for months like this, the reality is there is NO unfair
> advantage if people are HONEST about the process.

You are right this can go on and on and on, there is answers for each one.
It still remains that certain names have an advantage in the DNS over
others.
You are protesting that we take people with ligimate claims to the names
they own and take them back giving them to larger corporate to their
favor... I find that unfair.
I know and deal with a lot of name holders that would and rightly so sue
if such a thing happened as years of building a company on a name fall in
the matter of change over..
> The problem is the last 5 years the entire system has been abused to
> the hilt.

Hopefully we can see a stop to this with the new rules.

> MIT have ripped everyone off since day one.  Connect.COM.AU charged
> with  managing NET.AU supposedly for NETWORK naming, started door to
> door street  sales selling any name anyone would buy.

Well maybe in over charging but everyone.. the license fee is a bit high
but what is wrong with door to door sales.. I used to make a dollar and
feed my self like that once upon a time.. also I doute very much that they
sold the name to anyone who would buy with out having the policies
filled..
> The problem is not in "com.au" being an unfair name, it's in the fact
> that  idiots go around and promote name space in an unfair manner.
>

Hopefully we can see a stop to this with the new rules.

>>People sometimes mistakenly type the wrong thing, now for good or bad
>>this  does happen and people have differing options on it.
>
> So?  Does that mean if they mistakenly dial a wrong number Telstra
> should  refund the call charges?
>
> Gosh I use to have the number 482 1111 and got hundreds of daily calls
> for  481 1111.  Trying to sell the calls to Pizza hut failed so I sold
> them to  Domino's instead.  Is that an UNFAIR advantage?

No... not sure what you are getting at... you had a good number and you
sold it.. well done.. some people may have told telstra to give them
another number.. some may have started a making piazzas and others would
have simply unplugged the phone.
>>(some take advantage & some try to protect there interests against the
>>practice)
>
> Sadly this is true, and it's up to the supposed "self regulators" to
> solve  this problem.  However, instead of going to a little trouble and
> getting  some TV advertising space to EDUCATE the consumer, auDA will
> spend it money  on airfares, Christmas parties and other useless
> expenses.
>
> Or are you going to say auDA has NEVER paid for ANYONE'S airfare- EVER?

Now here I totally agree and I can only feel that the auDA should have
been using funds to educate the market via TV, radio and Mail.. NOT
EMAIL..
This should have happened months prior to the go-live date..


>>This would only help companies to secure domains that have high value
>>in type in value and take this away from the smaller companies who rely
>>on these domains to bring in business with a minimal cost to the
>>business.
>
> So is ABC Pty Limited for valuable than ABC (Registered in NSW) ??
>

I'm not referring to the value of the company or business but the value in
having a good name can be to a business. (On paper ABC P/L is mroe then
ABC (NSW), socially ABC P/L may fall far behind the family run ABC (nsw),
value of a company can be argued in may way but is not what we are
debating)
>>Same question applies here. What gives a company propriety rights over
>>the name more than a business of the same name?
>
> And that's my solution.  NONE.  Because xyz.com.au is a company
> incorporated under corporations law and xyz.nsw.au is a trade name
> registered under the NSW Business Names Act.
>
> SIMPLE.  No confusion and there is NO conflict.

We seem to go around in circles.. please read from the top to get my
thoughts.. there is a conflict that came about with state run name in a
commercial space.
Take the .us domain space... they ran on state.us structure... not any
more.. after expensive reviews it was deemed not to be a good idea because
of confusion and dilution of the .us name space. This is what you suggest
will be doing to the .au...
I'll leave it there as we could go on for ever and I think that most will
know where we are coming from.. both with our respective views.
Regards,

Michael-Pappas