Re: [DNS] BHP's OneSteel

Re: [DNS] BHP's OneSteel

From: David Keegel <djk§cyber.com.au>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 19:34:25 +1100 (EST)
] David Keegal wrote:
  David Keegel wrote:
 
] > Am I missing something here?  I don't understand this analysis.

Patrick Corliss wrote: 
 
] Hi David

] My feeling is that you understood the analysis but just didn't share my
] viewpoint.

I think rather that I don't understand one of your major assumptions.
I'm not even sure exactly what the assumption is.  Is the assumption that
if the standard form of your name is registered in all gTLDs, then your
name is protected?
 
I don't understand why registering onesteel.net or onesteel.org would be
a higher priority than registering one-steel.com or 1steel.com, in the
OneSteel case.  You seem to assume it is for some unknown reason.

] > So if OneSteel has onesteel.com and onesteel.com.au, I can't see why
] > they would care whether anyone had onesteel.net, onesteel.org, etc.
] 
] My first point was Deborah Ryder, a US resident registered onesteel.net on 27
] April 2000 before Megan Waine (acting for BHP) registered onesteel.com.au on 1
] May 2000.  Since the .com was registered on 6 April 2000 I saw that the 25-day
] delay caused a risk of losing the .com.au.

com.au has a number of policy rules which tend to protect Australian companies
who want to register their own company name, even if they aren't necessarily
the first people to think of registering that domain name.  If you're a random
foreigner who wants to cybersquat, its easy with the .com (non)policy, but
hard with the com.au policy (unless you have a business/legal presence in
Australia).
 
] As far as the .net and .org, I can register them both for about A$50.  I would
] have also registered the hyphenated versions.   The extra cost seems minor for
] such a simple preventative measure.

The cost is hardly relevant, for companies like BHP or OneSteel.  The
question is the effectiveness of this particular tactic.  Why should
OneSteel care if someone else registers onesteel.net and onesteel.org?

If I was them, I'd be much more worried about one-steel.com and 1steel.com
than onesteel.net and onesteel.org, because there is a risk that customers
could mis-type or mis-hear those addresses.

I can't imagine why any sane user would look for a clearly commercial company
like OneSteel Ltd at onesteel.org or onesteel.net without trying onesteel.com
first.

] But I agree that you have to draw the line somewhere and even you seem to
] agree that registering both the .com and the .com.au is worth doing.  Even
] that's one too many !!

Personally I'm not very keen on companies registering lots of different
names or on cybersquatters.  But I've tried hard to leave that difference
of viewpoint aside and concentrate on the question of effectiveness of
strategies.

] I'd just stretch it a little further . . .
 
As above, this isn't an argument about how far to go, its an argument
about which direction would make most sense.

__________________________________________________________________________
 David Keegel <djk&#167;cyber.com.au>  URL: http://www.cyber.com.au/users/djk/
Cybersource P/L: Unix Systems Administration and TCP/IP network management
Received on Wed Oct 25 2000 - 16:34:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Oct 22 2014 - 08:00:07 UTC