RE: [DNS] Interesting IRA

RE: [DNS] Interesting IRA

From: Mark Hughes <effectivebusiness§>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 00:16:31 +1000
I received offers in the paper mail yesterday from Internet Registrations
Australia to renew two domain names.

I like getting spam paper mail as much (as little) as I like getting spam
email.  But I'm pleasantly surprised by the actual content of the renewal
offers - they're far, far, less 'scam-like' then the previous stuff I have
received from various companies.

Some thoughts on this IRA one:

The information appears to be accurate, with the following exceptions:

1. The info in the FAQ section on the back re 'channel partners' of
Melbourne IT is clearly incorrect - as confirmed on this list by Melbourne

2. The statement "We will not be beaten on price or quality of service"
appears to be a blatant porky-pie, as I don't believe that Internet
Registrations Australia is unaware that the Registrar, Melbourne IT, offers
the same renewal service direct to Registrants for an amount
considerably less than the A$198 for two years that IRA is offering.

3. I am not a lawyer, but I suspect that the statement "I have read and
understand the terms and conditions of registration as found at" that's next to the box for signature may
have poor legal standing.   My guess is that IRA might have trouble making
that stick if it got to a court, or even to the ACCC.  I think the actual
terms and conditions would need to be a bit 'closer' to the signature (such
as on the paper), not just off in the ether on some web site somewhere, for
any independent assessment to come to the conclusion that it was reasonable
for the signatory to have read them.

On the plus side, it clearly states:

"You do not have to renew your domain name registration through Internet
Registrations Australia"


"There are several companies that compete for the renewal of domain

and it also makes clear that it is a renewal advice, not a tax invoice.

The renewal advices appear to have the correct domain name renewal dates.
This data hasn't come from the AUNIC whois, as the AUNIC data doesn't
include renewal dates.  So its either been extrapolated based on the
original domain name registration date, or its come from the  Melbourne IT
database, which of course is the database that holds the actual renewal

The domain name renewal dates are more than 60 days away.  This point does
not appear to be in violation of any published auDA policy that I can find.

Regards, Mark

Mark Hughes
Effective Business Applications Pty Ltd
+61 4 1374 3959
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:05 UTC