> 
> Paul Montgomery wrote:
> ...
> > 
> > I am including the story I wrote on the issue for this Friday's CW
> > below.  People here might be interested, as it mentions events on these
> > lists.  I hope there aren't too many glaring factual errors! Famous last
> > words? :-)
> ...
> There are indeed some significant errors in your CW article, and as this
> is the subject of a Federal Court action we are defending, it is
> important that I correct them immediately. To save readers' time, I will
> only quote the relevant sections of your report. Most of the rest of
> your report is reasonably accurate, if selective.  - PG  
> 
> > Last Thursday Melbourne IT, the administrator for the "com.au" domain -
> > the Web address space for local firms - was the subject of a Federal
> > Court lawsuit by a potential competitor, iiNet Technologies.
> > Melbourne IT has been asking companies with Web addresses suffixed with
> > "com.au" to renew their site names, for a fee of up to $125, or have
> > their sites removed from the Web. 

Peter, you forgot to remind Paul that "the Web" is not the internet, nor
is it the DNS. M-IT isn't selling "Web addresses". You'd think a journalist
would know the difference, or at least try and find out (or stop asking people
who don't know).  The AFR is typically guilty here, this was just the straw.

Do we have to get Media Watch to embarrass you guys?

tom§interact.net.au