> auDA is a private non-profit company
IANAL, but by my reading of the Corporations Act (2001) as auDA is not a
proprietary company but is company limited by guarantee, then its
technically a public company, not a private company.



> that makes money cartel style with government approval
Actually, its 'monopoly style', rather than 'cartel style'.  auDA is a
Regulatory Authority, and like most other Regulatory Authorities (think
about it) its a monopoly.  The ACCC has the power to allow Regulatory
Authorities to be monopolies.



> and government representation on the Board (as I understand it)
That's not correct either.  See http://www.auda.org.au/about/board.html.



> its internal operations including expenditure should be accountable and
open to transparent process
auDA budget, board minutes, and audited accounts are on the auDA web site.



> sub-contractors should provide services for tender on the same basis that
any government authority operates
When auDA reviews its suppliers of services, I would hope that 'general
competence', 'understanding of the domain name system', and 'the ability to
get facts right before posting to a public listserver' are major selection
criteria.



I'm making a list of the ten legal firms with the worst understanding of the
domain name system combined with the worst ability to get their facts right,
and who therefore should never be considered by auDA for the provision of
legal services.   Hmm, so far I seem to have the same company at positions
1, 2, and 3 on the list.






Regards, Mark

Mark Hughes
Effective Business Applications Pty Ltd
+61 4 1374 3959
www.pplications.com.au
effectivebusiness§applications.com.au