|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: dns-bounces+dassa=dhs.org§dotau.org 
|> [mailto:dns-bounces+dassa=dhs.org§dotau.org] On Behalf Of 
|> Adrian Chadd
|> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 1:43 AM
|> To: .au DNS Discussion List
|> Subject: Re: [DNS] Time 
|> fortherulestochangeregardingtransferringdomainnamelicences
|> 
|> On Tue, Sep 27, 2005, Ian Johnston wrote:
|> 
|> > "What is a lease?  A lease is a document that is a legally binding 
|> > agreement between the Government and you - the lessee. It 
|> is a written 
|> > document that sets out the rights and obligations of lessees and 
|> > states the purpose for which the land can be used."
|> > 
|> > There is a vibrant and well developed secondary market in leases.
|> 
|> Yup, but the investment into developing suitable land for 
|> leasing is quite high. You don't just "invent" new leases. 
|> Its a poor example here as the overhead of creating new 
|> domain names is much, much lower than developing property 
|> and services to lease.
|> 
|> There are also restrictions on what you can and can't do 
|> with your property - for example, zoning restrictions. You 
|> can't pick up some residential land and then lease it out to 
|> industry.

The point being land is a tangible asset whilst addressing information isn't.
The DNS is far more like the lease addressing scheme, you don't own the
descriptor to the location of your asset, only the asset itself.  The postal
service or the government can and does change the discriptor at times.

If your house is at 1 Blah Street, you can't sell that discriptor to anyone,
you can sell the associated asset and the discriptor will go with it.  Some
address discriptors have a higher value than others such as in some parts of
major cities but it is due to the assets behind the discriptor.  Domain names
should be treated the same.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch