Seems to me Mark is living in a fantasy world if he is suggesting auda can resist government recommendations.  Further, the fact that there are scammers means that auda should be more active in spending dollars pursuing them and shutting them down and enlist government to ensure this purpose is obtained for the community.

And yes auda has its own responsibilities under its founding documents to provide this information.  Mark fails to address this point.

Once again your reference to the address of a servced office where a number of businesses operate out of begs the question are all of those businesses acting in cohoots with the operator you refer to.  My god it is a conspiracy that conveniently supports your position and you lack any evidence that there is a relationship.  

Time to look beyond what the registrars want and look to what the community needs.

Further, you fail to address the OECD report Mark.  That is world opinion.  Perhaps you should address the issues raised in that as well.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> I would like to propose something contrary to many recent posts to this
> list - I propose a vote of thanks to Mr Guy.  Let me explain why.
> 
> 
> For many years, when most of the .au domain names used the AUNIC Registry,
> the database was available for download by anyone.  Many entities downloaded
> copies of the Registry.  In the end, some of them started using the data as
> a source for spam of various sorts, including unsolicited renewal notices -
> almost all of which were scams anyway.
> 
> After control of the AUNIC Registry was moved to auDA, auDA made the
> decision to stop the uncontrolled access to the database.  This made things
> more difficult for scammers, as they had to work from old copies of the
> database which were gradually going out of date, or try and keep them
> up-to-date by querying aunicstatus for the latest data.
> 
> Restrictions were also introduced on the number of queries entities could
> make.  This also made life harder for dodgy operators.  But, data fields
> such as the 'expiry date' were still visible.
> 
> When the .au Registry was moved to the new AusRegistry system, the 'expiry
> date' (the critical field used by scam 'domain name renewal' operators) was
> no longer visible - making things still more difficult for the dodgy folks.
> 
> 
> 
> So the history of the .au Registry under auDA's supervision is a history of
> changes that have gradually made things much more difficult for shonky
> domain name renewal operators.
> 
> 
> 
> And then auDA announces a review of the whois policy.  Now right then and
> there, if we'd put on our thinking hats we might have been able to guess
> some of the entities that might put in submissions - e.g. such as the ACCC.
> 
> But we also should have guessed that a review of the .au whois policy is a
> golden opportunity for any frustrated domain renewal scammer to put in a
> submission recommending removing the restrictions on the whois data, so that
> they could start up their scamming activities again with accurate data.
> 
> 
> 
> And that's why I'd like to thank Mr Guy.
> 
> 
> Having just done a re-read of the submissions to the .au whois policy review
> (see http://www.auda.org.au/policy/policy-review/), I note that the ONLY
> submission which supports both:
> 
> * making the domain name expiry dates public again, and
> * making bulk downloads available to entities other than law enforcement
> agencies
> 
> is Mr Guy's submission.
> 
> 
> I'm sure that Mr Guy doesn't support domain name renewal scams.  And I'm
> sure that his support for changes to the whois policy that happen to be just
> the changes that renewal scammers would like, is a complete and total
> co-incidence.  Just as it's a co-incidence that he operates from the same
> premises that a previous domain name renewal notice practioner of
> questionable integrity operated (operates?) from.
> 
> 
> However, Mr Guy's many postings to this listserver over the last week, which
> have so clearly demonstrated for everyone his unfailing:
> 
> * understanding of domain name issues
> * ability to consistently get facts right
> * thorough understanding of Privacy issues
> * mastery of English
> * ability to spell - or use a spell checker
> 
> have, I believe, highlighted that the existing restrictions on the .au whois
> should not be removed until it has been reliably determined that hell has
> frozen over.
> 
> 
> So, Mr Guy, my public vote of thanks to you.  I can now think of nothing
> that would scare me more than the thought of auDA removing some of the
> existing restrictions on the .au whois data - either what fields are
> available, or who they're available to.  This past week of postings to the
> listserver has conclusively demonstrated that any policy change that
> increases the risk that some entity with demonstrated lack of competence or
> morals might get access to the data, must be avoided.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards, Mark
> 
> 
> PS - just to show I don't play favourites and I'm happy to critique ANY
> submission, what about the ACCC's & ASIC's submissions to the .au whois
> policy review, eh?
> 
> ASIC supports:
> 
> " listing of Non personal email contact, business contact, registration
> information and currency dates. This should be achieved without the need to
> write to or fax auDA, reseller or registry."
> 
> while the ACCC says in their submission:
> 
> "The ACCC is of the view that there must be enough information publicly
> available to enable consumers to seek redress or to take private action.
> This requires the disclosure of the registered business address and business
> contact telephone number for .com.au and .net.au domain names."
> 
> Gee, if its so important to ASIC and the ACCC that customers of businesses
> are able to get the contact details for those businesses easily, then why
> doesn't the ASIC company search include the businesses' contact address and
> phone number???
> 
> On this, auDA is entitled to respond to them "We will if you will".  If ASIC
> refuses to make the information available in it's company search, why should
> auDA?
> 
> 
> Mark Hughes
> Effective Business Applications Pty Ltd
> +61 4 1374 3959
> www.pplications.com.au
> effectivebusiness§applications.com.au