RE: [DNS] Predatory business practice

RE: [DNS] Predatory business practice

From: Chris Disspain <ceo§auda.org.au>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:29:31 +1000
Morning Everyone,

We do what we can. auDA blocked ING's access to WHOIS about 2 weeks ago. At
present auDA has no other control over ING who are licensed to be re-sellers
by Melbourne IT. Maybe Domainz action will persuade MIT to do something.

Regards

Chris Disspain
CEO - auDA
ceo&#167;auda.org.au
+61-3-9226-9495
www.auda.org.au


-----Original Message-----
From: DPF [mailto:david&#167;farrar.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 4 September 2001 19:41
To: dns&#167;auda.org.au
Subject: Re: [DNS] Predatory business practice

On Mon, 03 Sep 2001 10:11:01 +0800, Jim Birch
<jbirch&#167;multinode.com.au> wrote:

>DPF wrote:
>
><snip>
>>
>> They also are facing termination as an accredited .nz provider.
>>
><snip>
>
>WHY aren't they already terminated as an accredited com.au supplier?
>
>The industry is supposed to be  self-regulated, no-one wants them, they are
clearly
>unethical, borderline illegal, they provide no advantage to Melbourne IT
over other
>resellers, offer a significant chance of dragging the industry into
(further) disrepute
>when if they disappear leaving a bunch of people with worthless paid ahead
domain names,
>so WHY are they still around?
>
>Melbourne IT are the de facto controllers of cum. name sales.  I cannot see
why they
>won't act.

For those interested we announced the following today:

(Bad enough you guys beat us at rugby but you also give us your
spamsters :-)

Internet Domain Name Protection Pty Ltd
Domainz has received a large number of complaints from people and
organisations to whom Internet Domain Name Protection Pty Ltd have
sent correspondence with reference to existing .nz domain names.

In the view of Domainz, their action in sending out large numbers of
letters to Name Holders is contrary to their obligations under the
Domainz .nz Provider Agreement - in particular Clause 4.1, where they
have agreed not to act in a way that will be detrimental to the
integrity or the performance of the register or the Internet
generally, and to act in good faith towards Name Holders and others.
This view is supported by the level and nature of the complaints which
we have received.

Some complainants have asked whether letters from Internet Domain Name
Protection Pty Ltd correctly represent the position in relation to the
new domains, or may be misleading Name Holders.  Others believe that
they have used information in the register for a purpose which was not
intended. Regardless of how they obtained the information, Domainz has
no wish to be involved with accredited .nz service providers who
engage in such practices.

Domainz has exercised it's right under clause 10 of the agreement and
has suspended the right of access to Internet Name Protection Pty Ltd
as we have not received an explanation of how they are going to remedy
these breaches of their agreement and how they will mitigate the
damage which they have caused to the reputation of Domainz and its
accredited service providers in New Zealand.

DPF


--
David Farrar, Secretary, InternetNZ
secretary&#167;isocnz.org.nz or david§farrar.com

--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 343 subscribers.
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.


--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 342 subscribers. 
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request&#167;auda.org.au to be removed.
Received on Tue Sep 04 2001 - 23:37:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Nov 26 2014 - 12:00:09 UTC