Potential conflicts of interest

[joshrowe]

For all the candidates who are standing for the auDA board at the coming election they should be aware that all board members must advise auDA at every board meeting of any current or potential conflicts of interest which exist between their role as an auDA board member and other activities they conduct.

With this in mind, I propose that all prospective candidates advise this forum of any current or potential conflicts of interest.

For those with conflicts of interest, will this still allow the candidates to operate effectively on the board - if so please describe how?

 

[DomainNames]

For all the candidates who are standing for the auDA board at the coming election they should be aware that all board members must advise auDA at every board meeting of any current or potential conflicts of interest which exist between their role as an auDA board member and other activities they conduct.

With this in mind, I propose that all prospective candidates advise this forum of any current or potential conflicts of interest.

For those with conflicts of interest, will this still allow the candidates to operate effectively on the board - if so please describe how?

Hi Josh Do you want to start it off to get the ball rolling?

 

[joshrowe]

Hi Josh Do you want to start it off to get the ball rolling?

Of course.

I do not have any current conflicts of interest which prevent me from carrying out my duties as an auDA board member.

Any potential conflicts of interest are declared and minuted at every auDA board meeting, see the "Continuous Disclosure" agenda item here on the latest board minutes for an example: http://www.auda.org.au/minutes/audaboardminutes15August11/

 

[neddy]

Josh, I'm not exactly sure what you're hinting at here. You've obviously got something or someone in mind - care to enlighten us?

From my experience, many elected officials (be it in the corporate world or government) can have conflicts of interest from time
to time. When this happens, it is normal for that person not to engage in debate or vote on an issue that affects them. But that
doesn't stop them being an effective member/director/elected official on all other issues.

Josh, I just need to clarify a couple of things please with regards to your position on conflicts of interest.

1. If a candidate was elected whose primary income source was via providing services to domainers - plus buying, monetising and selling domains;
   would that person potentially have a conflict of interest as an auDA Board Member? (Or could it also be beneficial to have that sort of experience
   on the Board?).
   
   
2. If a candidate was elected who, apart from their day job, bought, monetized and sold domains as a secondary interest, would you consider them
   to potentially have a conflict of interest? (Ditto re beneficial question).
   
   
3. If a candidate who is a practising solicitor (in the IP/TM area) was elected, would you consider them to potentially have a conflict of interest?
   Bearing in mind there are two such candidates for this election. (Or could it once again be beneficial?).
   
   
4. If points 1 to 3 above are not potentially conflicts; what to your mind is a conflict of interest?

Cheers, Ned

 

[joshrowe]

All of the candidates standing for election to the auDA board can provide value to auDA and the industry.

However, I'm not going to make a case for each candidate - that's their job as part of their campaign strategy!

As far as conflicts of interest go, auDA provides the following information:

from: http://www.auda.org.au/about/constitution/#_Toc445827202

23 DIRECTOR'S CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

A Director who holds an office or possesses a property whereby duties or interests might be created whether directly or indirectly in conflict with that Director's duties or interest as Director must, declare at a meeting of the Directors the fact and the nature and extent of the conflict.

from: http://www.auda.org.au/minutes/minutes-12022001/

The board re-affirmed that directors should exclude themselves from participating in decisions that may give rise to a conflict of interest.

Therefore, auDA members who are considering voting for prospective candidates may wish to know how many decisions that the candidates will be excluded from if they are elected to the board.

 

[sp@rky13]

Just some thoughts. A demand class member who owns domains (which would/should be all of them), would see benefit from things such as the waiving of the 6 month rule etc. Is that a conflict of interest, seeing as they would benefit (even monetarily) from the change of this rule?

 

[neddy]

Therefore, auDA members who are considering voting for prospective candidates may wish to know how many decisions that the candidates will be excluded from if they are elected to the board.

Josh, with respect, this is all nudge nudge, wink wink.

You're obviously alluding to something - I just don't know why you don't come out and say what's on your mind?

So please can you be straight up? If you don't, then voters have a right to think that you are simply engaging in smear tactics at this late stage. I don't think many of us will stand for unsubstantiated innuendo.

 

[joshrowe]

Josh, with respect, this is all nudge nudge, wink wink.

You're obviously alluding to something - I just don't know why you don't come out and say what's on your mind?

I'm not alluding to any specific candidate(s). I am interested in hearing from all candidates so that I can make an informed decision about who I should vote for.

So please can you be straight up? If you don't, then voters have a right to think that you are simply engaging in smear tactics at this late stage. I don't think many of us will stand for unsubstantiated innuendo.

I do not know what each candidate's interests are and I will not speak for each of them.

Having conflict(s) of interest DOES NOT mean that auDA members should not vote for a candidate. However, being aware in advance of potential conflicts is something that I (as an auDA member) want to understand before I vote for someone.

As proof that potential conflicts of interest do arise and are managed at auDA, see this Google search for examples of past declarations which auDA board members have made regarding potential conflicts of interest at auDA board meetings:

http://www.google.com.au/search?gcx...rg.au+"continuous+disclosure"+"board+minutes"

 

[DomainNames]

Hi Josh, Can I ask
1. how many domain names do you own and have you ever sold one?
2. What did you think of the process for registration, costs, Change of Registrant etc. What needs changing if anything?
3. Would you ever buy a domain name with a view to selling it later for a profit as an investment?
4. Do you think Australia needs a "reverse domain name hijacker" $5000 fee the same as is used in Canada whereby the complainant if proven as a reverse domain name hijacker pays the registrant an amount of $5000 to help cover their costs in defending the complaint. It seems unfair successful defences spend a lot of time and money and if they win but they get nothing back to cover their costs in Australia. Apparently this helps minimise Bad and often false complaints

http://cira.ca/assets/Documents/CDRPpolicy.pdf

“If the Registrant is successful, and the Registrant proves, on the balance of probabilities, that the Complaint was commenced by the Complainant for the purpose of attempting, unfairly and without colour of right, to cancel, or obtain a transfer of any Registration which is the subject of the Proceeding, then the Panel may order the Complainant to pay the Provider in trust for the Registrant an amount of up to five thousand dollars ($5000) to defray the costs incurred by the Registrant in preparing for, and filing material in the Proceeding. The Complainant will be ineligible to file another Complaint in respect or any Registration for any Provider until the amount owing is paid in full to the Provider”

5. Do you think Auda needs better, cheaper and more publicised appeal processes. Who is there who reviews Auda decisions, policies and what powers do they have exactly? An example would be auda doing a policy delete of someone's domain name. How can the Registrant appeal Auda's decision? Is it an independent review and at what cost and timeframe?

 

[joshrowe]

Hi Josh, Can I ask
1. how many domain names do you own and have you ever sold one?

I have a small portfolio of domain names across multiple gTLD and ccTLDs. I registered my first domain name in October 1995 (a .com.au).

I have both bought and sold domain names personally and corporately across various gTLDs and ccTLDs. I understand the need for a healthy and efficient domain name aftermarket from the buyer and seller perspectives.

2. What did you think of the process for registration, costs, Change of Registrant etc. What needs changing if anything?

The feedback I hear from this forum regarding the registration process / policy is mixed. Some are ok with .au's current policy whereas others want to see it become less restrictive. I believe there should be a level of restriction to give .au a difference over other domain name spaces. However, I'm not against changing the policy from what it is today.

.au domain name prices ($AU 24 / 2 yr with Crazy Domains) are comparable to .com domain name prices ($USD 12 / 1 year with GoDaddy).

I have not had any personal experiences with .au COR. However, the feedback I hear from this forum is that the process could be more automated (like .com) and cheaper (or free). It would be great to hear a registrar perspective on the COR process/cost - care to respond Brett?

3. Would you ever buy a domain name with a view to selling it later for a profit as an investment?

As per above, I have both bought and sold domain names personally and corporately across various gTLDs and ccTLDs. I understand the need for a healthy and efficient domain name aftermarket from the buyer and seller perspectives.

4. Do you think Australia needs a "reverse domain name hijacker" $5000 fee the same as is used in Canada whereby the complainant if proven as a reverse domain name hijacker pays the registrant an amount of $5000 to help cover their costs in defending the complaint. It seems unfair successful defences spend a lot of time and money and if they win but they get nothing back to cover their costs in Australia. Apparently this helps minimise Bad and often false complaints

I was not aware of this particular approach. I can see how it could protect registrants. It is certainly worthy of consideration. I'll raise it with the auDA board and staff.

5. Do you think Auda needs better, cheaper and more publicised appeal processes. Who is there who reviews Auda decisions, policies and what powers do they have exactly? An example would be auda doing a policy delete of someone's domain name. How can the Registrant appeal Auda's decision? Is it an independent review and at what cost and timeframe?

auDA has established a Registrant Review Panel to deal with this type of situation. The full details (including timeframes and costs) are described here: http://www.auda.org.au/policies/auda-2011-01/

Has anyone on this forum used this process? If so, I'd love to hear your feedback.

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

I have a small portfolio of domain names across multiple gTLD and ccTLDs. I registered my first domain name in October 1995 (a .com.au).

I have both bought and sold domain names personally and corporately across various gTLDs and ccTLDs. I understand the need for a healthy and efficient domain name aftermarket from the buyer and seller perspectives.



The feedback I hear from this forum regarding the registration process / policy is mixed. Some are ok with .au's current policy whereas others want to see it become less restrictive. I believe there should be a level of restriction to give .au a difference over other domain name spaces. However, I'm not against changing the policy from what it is today.

.au domain name prices ($AU 24 / 2 yr with Crazy Domains) are comparable to .com domain name prices ($USD 12 / 1 year with GoDaddy).

I have not had any personal experiences with .au COR. However, the feedback I hear from this forum is that the process could be more automated (like .com) and cheaper (or free). It would be great to hear a registrar perspective on the COR process/cost - care to respond Brett?



As per above, I have both bought and sold domain names personally and corporately across various gTLDs and ccTLDs. I understand the need for a healthy and efficient domain name aftermarket from the buyer and seller perspectives.



I was not aware of this particular approach. I can see how it could protect registrants. It is certainly worthy of consideration. I'll raise it with the auDA board and staff.



auDA has established a Registrant Review Panel to deal with this type of situation. The full details (including timeframes and costs) are described here: http://www.auda.org.au/policies/auda-2011-01/

Has anyone on this forum used this process? If so, I'd love to hear your feedback.

Josh, I can tell you that last time I spoke to Jo, no one had used this process. I don't believe that it is an effective process for a number of reasons for example the fee is $750 so it is not affordable if you want a review for a $50 domain name, there are also some other concerns I have. Maybe the auDA Board can let me attend a meeting to give them a run down on it - last time I asked I was refused entry to present to the board.

 

[joshrowe]

Josh, I can tell you that last time I spoke to Jo, no one had used this process. I don't believe that it is an effective process for a number of reasons for example the fee is $750 so it is not affordable if you want a review for a $50 domain name, there are also some other concerns I have. Maybe the auDA Board can let me attend a meeting to give them a run down on it - last time I asked I was refused entry to present to the board.

I'd like to hear your feedback - want to grab a coffee ?

 

[brettf]

I have not had any personal experiences with .au COR. However, the feedback I hear from this forum is that the process could be more automated (like .com) and cheaper (or free). It would be great to hear a registrar perspective on the COR process/cost - care to respond Brett?

It was covered pretty in depth in the secondary market working group and I think those minutes are available on the auDA site.

If you want my very short answer, well ok reasonably short. Each time change to policy comes up, the line gets thrown out that '.au has perceived security and trust because of existing policies'. I'd counter that in the broad community that simply doesn't exist, a domain is a domain is a domain. The last published study I saw of fraud/crime by ccTLD we placed from memory behind .nz which has an open policy much like the gTLD's.

So getting to the point. Registrars are simply the technical interface between the public and and registry. For a group like NR who has accreditations in .uk, .nz, .au and gTLD's our interfaces simply let people do what they need to in line with policy. Clearly in .com a registrant simply updates the registrant contact and ownership is assigned and registrars already have technology in place that facilitates that.

So at a technical level (and a business level) I'm an advocate for simply mirroring the gTLD model. People have domains they can do what they want with them.

The sticking point in all this, is that auDA would need to completely deconstruct their highly legal view of a domain license in order to accommodate this. If they did that, then I could really see no point to have a requirement for a supporting business registration in a domain registration. And if that's not required, then the eligibility and allocation policy, ie close and substantial is also not required. So we'd go to a model just like say .nz.

Personally I'd say that would generally be good. auDA and some segments of the community would think those removals would be terrible and returning to my first paragraph just to tie things up, there would be a panel, some on the panel would be preaching end of days, end of the internet, we'd hear over and over this perceived security value of com.au domains etc etc if the restrictions were to be removed. You'd never get consensus and removal of those barriers/polices would never happen.

So that's both my personal opinion and an opinion of a registrar.

 

[neddy]

So at a technical level (and a business level) I'm an advocate for simply mirroring the gTLD model. People have domains they can do what they want with them.

The sticking point in all this, is that auDA would need to completely deconstruct their highly legal view of a domain license in order to accommodate this. If they did that, then I could really see no point to have a requirement for a supporting business registration in a domain registration. And if that's not required, then the eligibility and allocation policy, ie close and substantial is also not required. So we'd go to a model just like say .nz.

...........

So that's both my personal opinion and an opinion of a registrar.

Hear, hear! I totally agree.