TrafficSauce
Regular Member
http://www.auda.org.au/mailouts/aud...ould-.au-be-opened-up-for-direct-registration
...for anyone who hasn't received notification.
...for anyone who hasn't received notification.
auDA Media Release: Should .au be opened up for direct registration?
- Thread starter TrafficSauce
- Start date
Honan
Top Contributor
I believe the choice for me to vent was monkey survey or email
I chose the monkey
I am not clear as to why I should object to individual Australians being given an opportunity to register goodURLbadURL.au without the need to declare they want an ABN to make a profit.
I can concede that AUDA and Ausregistry might have an interest in making money
I chose the monkey
I am not clear as to why I should object to individual Australians being given an opportunity to register goodURLbadURL.au without the need to declare they want an ABN to make a profit.
I can concede that AUDA and Ausregistry might have an interest in making money
findtim
Top Contributor
admin, should you join these threads? https://www.dntrade.com.au/threads/auda-2015-names-policy-panel.9525/
its gonna get confusing otherwise IMO
tim
its gonna get confusing otherwise IMO
tim
I am not sure, but you seem to be buying into AUDA's strategy of conflating two separate issues here. NZ never had any onerous restrictions of domain name ownership so it is possible to not have restrictions of ownership and maintain the current structure.
But AUDA might be relying on people wanting to remove the ownership restrictions, if that is the case, and then just assuming this also means opening up the .au space for direct registration.
It's also funny (in a sad kind of way) how we didn't follow NZ's lead for the past few decades regarding no ownership restrictions but now that NZ has done something which if followed in AUS will make AUDA money all of a sudden NZ is used as an authority on the way things should be.
snoopy
Top Contributor
I'd say the issue is AUDA red tape. The restrictions on .com.au need to go rather than than alternate coming in,
In my view the justifications in the paper are weak,
-First following the uk and new zealand, why? Both those countries have comparatively weak namespaces.
-The bit about new tlds doesn't have much basis either, because those new tlds look to be failing.
At least though they acknowledge .melbourrne and .sydney to be duds,
Cooper Mills DomainLawyer
Top Contributor
Great feedback Snoopy, you should email in your views to the Panel
Data Glasses
Top Contributor
.Melbourne and .Sydney marketing meeting
"Hey let's charge double for extensions no-ones ever heard of!"
reply ... "Brilliant! ,,, I'll get to it"
"Hey let's charge double for extensions no-ones ever heard of!"
reply ... "Brilliant! ,,, I'll get to it"
snoopy
Top Contributor
I'm there Spacey, I can imagine Ausregistry sitting down with the Lord Mayor telling him how well this is all going.
Sir .melbourne has grown by 5000% in 6 months! We are nearly double the Sydney total! Those millions you paid us was well spent.
[Ausregistry staff pour Lord Mayor another glass of Bollinger].
Sir, I want to tell you about a new proposal.....how would you feel about .mel?
Data Glasses
Top Contributor
Only after he angrily claps his hands in disdain at the whole concept of doing something yourself
It isn't double. I'm seeing .Sydney go for $90+ p.a. for non-premium handreg - That's at least quadruple which is INSANE relative to .com, .au, and probably other gtlds.
Erwin
Top Contributor
An article I found on the .UK namespace debate, opinions could be related to the .AU debate
https://econsultancy.com/blog/63841-nominet-ploughs-ahead-with-uk-domains-despite-opposition/
https://econsultancy.com/blog/63841-nominet-ploughs-ahead-with-uk-domains-despite-opposition/
Erwin
Top Contributor
Supposing .au opens up, and the .com.au/net.au'ers were allowed to have 1st preference, by having two domains might
It would seem the most logical step to take, should it happen..
Then.. there's the issue of ™ holders to condend with also!..
It would seem the most logical step to take, should it happen..
Then.. there's the issue of ™ holders to condend with also!..
petermeadit
Top Contributor
All the information is published on the auDA website here: http://www.auda.org.au/policies/panels-and-committees/2015-names-policy-panel/
A direct link to the survey responses are here: http://www.auda.org.au/assets/pdf/2015npp-issuespaper-surveyresponses.pdf
A direct link to the survey responses are here: http://www.auda.org.au/assets/pdf/2015npp-issuespaper-surveyresponses.pdf
Erwin
Top Contributor
Thanks
reading some of the responses they seem to favour .au at the 2nd level. More than I thought to be honest..
Erwin
Top Contributor
Here's a question:
Do you 'expect' to see the same business appear when direct navigating/searching?
Shoes.uk v shoes.co.uk
Shirts.nz v shirts.co.nz?
And assume they are the same business entity?
The namespace is changing and ppls mindset is changing.. Is consumer confusion the same today, as it was say 3-5yrs ago? I wonder..
Just putting it out there..
Do you 'expect' to see the same business appear when direct navigating/searching?
Shoes.uk v shoes.co.uk
Shirts.nz v shirts.co.nz?
And assume they are the same business entity?
The namespace is changing and ppls mindset is changing.. Is consumer confusion the same today, as it was say 3-5yrs ago? I wonder..
Just putting it out there..
