>There will always be a few people who will try to get around any rules.
>Fact of life, you can only make rules to stop the majority and try to redress
>any issues as they come up.

You seem to be missing the point that these rules are in fact designed to
stop the minority, at the expense of the vast majority of registrants who
just want to register their chosen name at a reasonable price and get on
with running their business.

>One way is the current policy of not allowing resale of domain names, takes
>away the opportunity for them to make a profit trading in names or at the
>very least makes it more difficult and so assists in enforcing the policy.
>All the policies tend to work together.

The current policy does not prohibit the resale of domain names at all.
 It simply forces people into the rather farcial situation where they have
to pretend that they're selling a business for which the domain name is
an asset.

>Take IP out of the definition and the intent is the same.  You may call
>it a bird but if it quacks it is still a duck.

The intent may be the same but we're talking about policies to prevent certain
market behaviours.  There are effective mechanisms in place to combat IP
infringement.  There are not for domain warehousing.  It is therefore a
separate issue.

>As the other policies would be weakened and there would not be any barriers
>to a full scale assault of cybersquatting or "warehousing".

Incorrect.  There are effective mechanisms in place for dealing with cybersquatting
that would be unaffected by the removal of the allocation policy.   Warehousing
is happening now in the .au domain space and has been for many years.  As
I've said, I don't believe that there is an effective way to proscribe domain
warehousing without adversely affecting the vast majority of "legitimate"
registrants.  I also don't see that is the major problem that you seem to
assume it is.

>Making sure the opportunities for scammers and others to make a profit
>are not there and trying to keep them out.  Sure it takes work and it makes
>it harder on everyone but I don't want to see the .au namespace ending
>up like the gTLDs.  It is reasonably clean at the moment.

I'm not arguing with your intentions, I'm just trying to point out the reality
that (a) the current allocation rules do not prevent warehousing and (b)
that warehousing is not necessarily a "bad thing" anyway.  IMHO, as long
as there is some local presence eligibility requirement, .au domain names
will continue to have a degree of perceived value in the Australian market.
 I also believe however that the other restrictions on registration are
neither effective nor particularly necessary and should therefore be removed.

jon