--- Jess Latherson <brisneylandgirl&#167;gmail.com> wrote:

> > Tony Owen <tony&#167;seol.net.au> wrote:
> > My personal opinion is that Registrars should not
> be allowed to speculate
> 
> > > Bennett Oprysa <bennett&#167;enetica.com.au> wrote:
> > > It would be good to point out show me ONE .au
> registrar that does this, I bet you can't.
> 
> I don't think registrars mis-use their position but
> I would say
> Australian Style aka Bottle Domains/Domain Central
> would be the most
> prominent registrar that could be classified as a
> domain speculator. A
> few examples I've seen that fall out of their "suite
> of ISP related
> services and products" include:
> 
> football.com.au
> travel.net.au
> magazines.net.au
> 

Is this allowed under the monetisation policy as two
are registered Australian entities.

TRAVEL PTY LTD - ACN 088 291 418
FOOTBALL PTY LTD - ACN 113 331 427

If you register a name under close & substantial
monetisation who checks to see if policy is being
followed at time of registration. Enetica I am sure
will say it is not their responsibility. Does every
registration need to be challenged for auDA to take
steps?

Why hasn't the registrant warranty policy been updated
to include the new clauses regarding monetisation.

Also a worry is Vic's comments that he has no problems
with domain tasting. With the current review of Domain
Expiry policy you would hope that auDA would expressly
forbid this practice as if they don't (which also
means wording the policy correctly) then registrars
like enetica who like to "maximise the rules" will
once again walk all over them. 


DJ


		
___________________________________________________________ 
All New Yahoo! Mail ? Tired of Vi&#167;gr@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html