Ian Thank you for that info I can see the strategy involved but the contractual terms and conditions surely ceased when auDA took control so why not that date rather than 1 August 2002? I have had a matter waiting for action since December last year but had no policy to which to seek redress through. I am sure this cannot be an isolated case and expect that there are several others who are also being disadvantaged by the regulation of this policy not being afforded to us in a timely manner The way the policy has been implemented clearly attempts to ignore my valid claim and that of others during the interim period. Why are we being discriminated against to the fortune of those who hold licence prior to 1 August 2002 but after the date that auDA took over from Melb IT ?? Phil Wright -----Original Message----- From: Ian Johnston [mailto:ian.johnston§infobrokers.com.au] Sent: Tuesday, 30 July 2002 4:57 PM To: Phil Wright Cc: DNS Subject: [DNS] FW: [DNS] auDA Media Release Phil See the Name Policy Advisory Panel (NPAP) recommendation in its Final Report of 2001 to the auDA Board (reproduced below). A key issue for the NPAP was how contractual terms and conditions between existing domain name licence holders and MelbourneIT could be varied. Many licences in .com.au were issued under: - com.au Domain Name Allocation Policy <www.inww.com/policies/comaupolicy.php3> and - Terms and Conditions for a com.au Domain Name Licence <www.inww.com/policies/comauterms.php3>. Over-riding legislation was out of the question. Ian ENDNOTE 3.8 Retrospectivity Recommendation: Changes to domain name eligibility and allocation policies do not have retrospective effect for current domain name licence holders. The new policy will only apply to existing domain name licences if the licence is re-registered to a different entity, or when the existing licence holder�s licence expires. The Panel recognises that �grandfathering� is accepted practice when introducing policy changes. Entities that licensed a domain name under the existing policies will have security of tenure over that licence (provided they continue to renew the licence as required). The Panel notes that the intent of its recommended policy changes is to relax the current policies, thereby allowing more domain names to be licensed by more people. Therefore, it should not be the case that existing domain name licence holders would �lose� their licence under the new policy, even if they were not expressly protected. The Panel has reached this conclusion after considering the inconsistencies created by preserving the status of some domain name licence holders under the old policy, while requiring others to comply with the new policy. -----Original Message----- From: Phil Wright [mailto:newsstuff§network.au.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 4:31 PM To: dns§lists.auda.org.au Subject: RE: [DNS] auDA Media Release "This demonstrates that auDA is serious about enforcing ethical behaviour in the domain name industry, and is prepared to act swiftly to protect registrants," said auDA CEO, Chris Disspain. Why not the same sense of urgency or swiftness when it comes to the 'new' auDRP ? Why should domain licences that were issued prior to 1 August 2002 be offered grace and perceived protection until renewal?? "Domain name licences that were issued before 1 August 2002 are not subject to a mandatory administrative proceeding under the auDRP: until the domain name licence is renewed; or unless the registrant voluntarily elects to be bound by the auDRP before their domain name licence is renewed." http://www.auda.org.au/policy/audrp/ Seems like auDA is attempting to enforce the new auDRP with a clear bias that seemingly attempts to protect current domain holders despite there being considerable time since a Dispute Resolution Process was available to parties with competing or superseding rights? Is everyone happy with the auDRP being geared with such bias? Surely it is improper to suggest that antecedent and other rights should be forced to wait and only exercised when or after a renewal become due? Phil Wright -----Original Message----- From: Dave Hooper [mailto:dave§davehooper.net] Sent: Tuesday, 30 July 2002 10:18 AM To: dns§lists.auda.org.au Subject: RE: [DNS] auDA Media Release > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Disspain [mailto:ceo§auda.org.au] > Sent: Tuesday, 30 July 2002 9:32 AM > To: dns§auda.org.au > Subject: [DNS] auDA Media Release > > auDA takes action on Internet Registry Pty Ltd mail out "Stop!" "If you don't stop, I'll say stop again!" Dave Hooper ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/ Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the author, further information at the above URL. (347 subscribers.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/ Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the author, further information at the above URL. (347 subscribers.) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/ Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the author, further information at the above URL. (347 subscribers.)Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:06 UTC