>| something to him so he would change his attitude and his misleading >| marketing techniques while representing the highest authority for domain >| names in Australia, but so far, nothing ... There is absolutely nothing but >| nonsense and misleading material on his "personal homepage" .. > >I know I have spoken to him about it, and he steadfastly believes he is >doing the right thing and that it is 100% legal and there is nothing >auDA can do about it. And thus is why "self-regulation" of an industry by the people exploiting the industry is NOT a public interest. auDA can't do anything about it because it would, in the eyes of the public, be bad to remove a director that was elected by all those who are "suppliers" to the industry that auDA claims to be regulating and protecting. Ouch. >| What do you make of that, Kim, can we have some sort of clarification ? > >I think using confusingly similar domains etc is unethical. I have >told him this. I don't know if it is illegal. I am no expert on these >matters. I don't think the remedy Instra gave when auDA first took them >to task over www.aunic.net.au is good enough (that is, the link and the >top sentence of the web page.) Nope, I'd say that is "similar or confusing" to the consumer. Which is why net.au should be reserved for NETWORK OPERATIONS only and aunic, should point to the aunic web site. Clearly auDA wasn't "fast enough" to BUY the names in ALL the name spaces it needed as it's own policies and politics demands. No surprise auDA is looking for a nasty round of consumer class actions in the future. What's worse is - Connect Com Au - ALLOWED the name to be registered and even probably cashed in on the sale! Just shows how DECEPTIVE the entire "supplier" Class really is - doesn't it.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