[DNS] Seeking Redress for Domain Name Rejections

[DNS] Seeking Redress for Domain Name Rejections

From: Patrick Corliss <patrick§quad.net.au>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 09:10:21 +1100
Hi Kerry

Thank you for that.  You've raised some interesting points (particular as I'm
on one panel and have nominated for the auDA Board).

I'm not a lawyer.  My off-the-cuff view is as follows:

The provisions of common law and Corporations Law will apply to all directors
of auDA.  This law gives effect to auDA's Constitution.  They owe a "duty of
care" and must not be negligent.  They must also act honestly.

Those responsibilities could mean:

(a)    Any changes must be publicly announced for all to know.
(b)    There must be no retrospectivity.
(c)    Anyone who applied before and was refused must be treated equitably (as
they were before) with all other applicants.
(d)    There's scope for insurance to cover directors' liability.

But I'll think about it some more.

Best regards
Patrick Corliss


----- Original Message -----
From: Kerry Henry <KHenry&#167;ClickOn.au.com>
To: <dns&#167;auda.org.au>
Sent: Friday, November 24, 2000 6:28 AM
Subject: Re: [DNS] .au space proposal


> Patrick & other auDA members,
>
> The following is an extract from an email I understand is circulating
> amongst a few that I feel all should see.
>
> I am not a legal eagle and haven't read the auDA charter, but I sure would
> love to know the answers.
>
> I am aware of a number of major corporates who have indicated in the past
> that they would seek redress if prior rejection for preferred domain name
> registration were subsequently reversed and issued to another.
>
> If potential legal battles are looming, then auDa, the Panel and Members
> need to have a clear 'handle' on the outcomes.
>
> Kerry Henry
>
> >>It is all very well to be exploring the pros and cons of various ways in
> which changes to the existing system >>would may or may not work, however, I
> haven't seen where a number of basic issues have been clarified.
> > >
> > >1)  There will be backlash and no doubt litigation based on any changes
> made as there will  be both >>advantaged and disadvantaged parties.  Is auDA
> exposed?  What systems are in place to protect auDA
> >> from the backlash of those who don't agree or like any changes made?
> >>
> > >2)  Is the auDA Panel exposed?   As an entity sub to the organisation, is
> the Panel open to litigation or >>financially exposed in any way?
> >>
> > >3)  Could individual Panel members be in personally financial jeopardy or
> be compromised by decisions >>made or implemented by auDA or other Panel
> members?  Where is the protection?
> >>
> > >4)  Is it possible that the Members of the auDA could themselves be
> called upon to financially support any >>financial exposures created by
> decisions
> > >instigated  by the Association and its Panel Members ?
> > >
> > >5)  Are auDA members in a position where they could be held accountable
> with or without the provisions of >>the auDA constitution?
> > >
> > >The entire review process may well amount to nothing if the above issues
> are a potential exposure for >>auDA, the Panel and the Members.
> > >
>
>
> --
> This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
> express permission of the author.  You don't know who really wrote it.
> 356 subscribers. Archived at http://lists.waia.asn.au/list/dns (dns/dns)
> Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.
>
Received on Fri Nov 24 2000 - 06:08:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Sep 02 2014 - 04:00:08 UTC