RE: [DNS] Opportunity knocks (Correction for the record)

RE: [DNS] Opportunity knocks (Correction for the record)

From: Ian Johnston <ian.johnston§infobrokers.com.au>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 10:27:28 +0800
Dear Chris

I did not write the following (Reference: [DNS] Opportunity knocks, 7 Nov
2001, at 3:07).

You have attributed to me, comments made by Adrian Stephan (Reference: [DNS]
Domain Names & Trade, Tuesday, November 06, 2001 1:58 PM - see below).

If your email was posted elsewhere, please notify correction.

Regards

Ian Johnston

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Berkeley - Netmastery [mailto:chris&#167;netmastery.com.au]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 5:29 AM
> To: dns&#167;auda.org.au
> Subject: [DNS] Opportunity knocks
>
> On 7 Nov 2001, at 3:07, Ian Johnston wrote:
>
> > From my experience in these issues, the Libs have absolutely no
> > credibility and in particular Hockey and Alston should be banished to
> > oblivion forever. The protection of lawfully approved names is so
> > fundamental to doing business and both Hockey and Alston have failed
> > in this protection.  I think that this is such a single fundamental
> > failure that, after 37 years voting Liberal, I cannot see how I can
> > support the Liberal candidates.  It is the only thing I can do to show
> > my anger at these two people.
> >
>
> Quite right too. And whilst we are at it Victorian readers should
> take the opportunity of voting below the line and numbering all
> squares just so that they can show how grateful the internet
> community is for all Dick Alston's efforts and put him last (ie. 50)
> on the Senate Ballot paper (that's the big one).
>
> Vote early and often!
>
> Chris Berkeley
>
>
> ==========================================
> PO Box 505
> (94 Mississippi Road)
> Seven Hills   NSW  1730
> Phone: 02 9896 3844
> Fax: 02 9920 0460
>
> ===========================
>
> "Who cares what you think?"
>                 - George W. Bush
>                   4th July 2001
>
> --
> This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
> express permission of the author. 324 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.


-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Johnston [mailto:ian.johnston&#167;infobrokers.com.au]
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 3:07 AM
To: DNS
Cc: akstephan&#167;ozemail.com.au
Subject: FW: [DNS] Domain Names & Trade Marks

Kenneth

With reference to your comments below, I would like to suggest you consider
the ACCC submission (21/03/01) to the Name Policy Advisory Panel at
<http://www.auda.org.au/policy/panel-name-2000/submissions/accc.html>,
responding to a (draft) recommendation (3.1.3 f) in the Panel's second
public consultation report at
<http://www.auda.org.au/docs/auda-name-eligibility-pcr2.html>.

(Draft) recommendation 3.1.3 f. reads: The domain name licence applicant
must acknowledge at the time of application that their entitlement to a
domain name may be challenged by a third party with superior legal rights in
the words forming the domain name.

Note the following sentence from the ACCC submission: ... The ACCC is
unaware of any law or legal ruling that suggests that one right is superior
to another in this area. ...

The Panel meeting of 27 March 2001 discussed the question of any "superior
legal rights" in relation to trade marks.  The Panel decided to not include
(draft) recommendation 3.1.3 f. in its final report to the auDA Board
<http://www.auda.org.au/docs/auda-name-eligibility-final.html>.

IMO this was a prudent decision in view of the ACCC submission and opinions
expressed by Panel members present
<http://www.auda.org.au/policy/panel-name-2000/papers/27Marchminutes.html>.

Other Panel members may wish to comment.

Regards

Ian

~~~~~
Ian Johnston
Candidate for the auDA Board
www.infobrokers.com.au/resume
Member, Name Policy Advisory Panel
Member, Competition Model Advisory Panel
mailto:ian.johnston&#167;infobrokers.com.au


-----Original Message-----
From: Adrian Stephan [mailto:akstephan&#167;ozemail.com.au]
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 1:58 PM
To: dns&#167;auda.org.au
Subject: RE: [DNS] Domain Names & Trade Marks

Dear Kenneth

I have full sympathy with you on this matter. I have been denied my lawful
company name "logistics" as a domain name because Jan Webster deemed it to
be a generic word.  That fact that she approved other words such as
reliability, dependability and a whole bunch of other non-allowed words
(kraft, mtbuller, etc) as domain names is totally irrelevant.  How she can
say that logistics is generic whereas reliability and dependability are not,
simply defies any logic.

As I see it the problem is that Minister's Hockey and Alston digitally
disenfranchised every business name, trademark, etc in this country and
abdicated this to the folks at MelbourneIT and now auDA.  In fact, they
legislated into law the very thing that S-11 and others complain about in
globalisation, etc.  We no longer have sovereignty over our names, we have
to acquiesce to global self-regulation!

I believe the Government, who has a responsibility to protect such names
under the Paris convention, should have put in place the necessary orders of
precedence to ensure that rights, etc were protected.  However, is seems as
if they did not, and more to the point don't give a stuff or even care less.
If you want an enlightening discussion, try and rationalise the position
with their staffs.

Although MelbourneIT and auDA are the public face of this issue, the people
who should be held accountable are Minister's Hockey and Alston.  They
failed to protect our names, and not only that set up a process where as
small companies we make lawyers rich defending our  rights.  The end result
is that we don't and get shafted.  Is this the grand plan!

To me it is a simple issue, the policy should be based on how the Courts
would interpret precedence and not on how auDA and its committee thinks it
should work.

We have got to stop using this euphemism of cybersquatting - call it exactly
what it is - identity theft.  The only person I have seen call it right is
Justice Anderson in the NZ High Court on the Qantas case - "... an
instrument of fraud ..."

The blatant stupidity is that we cannot have our lawful names as our domain
names, but it is a 5 year jail or $60,000 fine if you onforward an email
without the author's permission.  Talk about getting your priorities right!

>From my experience in these issues, the Libs have absolutely no credibility
and in particular Hockey and Alston should be banished to oblivion forever.
The protection of lawfully approved names is so fundamental to doing
business and both Hockey and Alston have failed in this protection.  I think
that this is such a single fundamental failure that, after 37 years voting
Liberal, I cannot see how I can support the Liberal candidates.  It is the
only thing I can do to show my anger at these two people.

Maybe it is time a few of us got together and took out a class action suit
against the Government, MelbourneIT and auDA.

Rgds

Adrian

===========================================
Adrian Stephan (Managing Director)
Logistics Pty Ltd
POB 5068
PINEWOOD  VIC  3149
Ph: +61 (0)3 9888 2366 Fx: +61 (0)3 9888 2377
akstephan&#167;ozemail.com.au
adrian.stephan&#167;logistic.com.au
www.logistic.com.au
===========================================

-----Original Message-----
From: Kenneth Brownsmith [mailto:kb&#167;kb.au.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 6 November 2001 15:21 PM
To: dns&#167;auda.org.au
Subject: Re: [DNS] Domain Names & Trade Marks

It doesn't matter weather they infringe on a trademark or not, the criteria
for registering .au names (new policy) is that a trademark is *one* of the
accepted means...  ( I hope that made sense)

Hence, I have a registered trademark that is being directly infringed on in
com.au, if I want to recover it, I will have to take legal action (According
to Chris D.)  because the auDRP takes, oh lets say an ABN, in the same light
as a Registered Trademark...  (If I interpreted Chris' email properly)

Does Intellectual *Property* mean anything these days ?

So, essentially, if I am correct, it doesn't matter weather they check
ATMOSS or not, if they have a ABN or RBN or something other than a
trademark, they will be accepted anyway...

That might be a little off track, but I think it is an issue that needs to
be addressed too...

Kenneth Brownsmith
kb&#167;kb.au.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Brown" <abrown&#167;golook.com.au>
To: <dns&#167;auda.org.au>
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 11:50 AM
Subject: [DNS] Domain Names & Trade Marks

> With the changing of the Domain Eligibility criteria to include Trade
Marks.
> What requirements if any will be placed on registrars to check the ATMOSS
> data base, to ensure that domain applicants are not infringing a trade
mark.
>
> Regards
>
> Adrian Brown

 ... snip ...

--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 324 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 Nov 06 2001 - 23:32:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun Nov 23 2014 - 00:00:12 UTC