auDA Board Elections

[DomainNames]

I'm not going to enter the debate of whether .AU domains are over- or under-priced, but it's not just gTLD domains that .AU should be compared with but also other comparable ccTLDs.

On second level registrations, it should be noted there has to be several reforms take place to allow this so that it is fair for existing registrants. Unfortunately the debate in .AU when the Names Policy Panel asks about it asks about several options, where a scenario(s) should be outlined so people understand what changes need to take place.

On the prices given by DomainNames, you neglected Asia Registry. They charge $US20 per year for a .AU name, so are probably even cheaper still.

On why people register .AU names over .COM when .COM are cheaper, there are several reasons, some of which are that people and businesses like to register a domain name from their own country, the easier availability of preferred names and probably more.

David netregistry.com.au is $20 per year which makes them $40. Please David a new extension .au would be just crazy. The only people who want new extensions such as .au are AUDA ( who makes money from every new registration ) and registrars/ resellers / lawyers ( who will need to defend existing .com.au owners rights). What would seek pay for seek.au to protect seek.com.au or what would realestate.com.au have to pay to protect themself if realestate.au was allowed? If you spent $125,000 buying investmentproperty.com.au today do you think its fair somone else can go and buy investmentproperty.au ?

the confusion of just having .au would be a minefield for nearly everyone.. yes some will profit... but whats the reason for it being needed? We already have .com.au, .org.au, .net.au, .gov.au, .id.au etc etc a new extension for .au is not needed and needs to be stopped and not continually pushed by some who wants to gain from it

 

[Lemon]

Are you talking about initial registration fees or aftermarket prices?

Sorry I should clarify. I mean the auDA fee, which I believe is $11.

And yes aftermarket prices are high. What is the percentage of sales to listings through the aftermarket.
Drops are probably a better representation of market price however it does amuse me what some people buy and I don't understand the rationalisation behind it.

Lemon

 

[David Goldstein]

Unfortunately DomainNames you are wrong. Your suggestions of who would support second level registrations couldn't be further from the truth.

While I don't know the auDA position I have found almost no support from registrars and resellers and hostility from lawyers to the idea.

However international experience shows registrants love the idea.

As for my proposals, can you re-read them if you want to engage me debating them. You haven't understood them. My proposal would be the only registrants that could initially apply for seek.au, your example, would be registrants for seek.com.au and seek.net.au, and maybe registrants in other 2LDs.

As for confusion - there have been quite a few registries that have introduced registrations at the second level when originally registrations were only available at the third level. Do you really think Australians are stupider than Austrians, Koreans, Chinese and Japanese, to name but a few?

As for your closing sentence, "...continually pushed by some who wants to gain from it", I presume where you wrote "some" you mean "someone" and are inferring I have something to gain from it. I have nothing to gain from any change or keeping the status quo.

 

[DomainNames]

Sorry I should clarify. I mean the auDA fee, which I believe is $11.

And yes aftermarket prices are high. What is the percentage of sales to listings through the aftermarket.
Drops are probably a better representation of market price however it does amuse me what some people buy and I don't understand the rationalisation behind it.

Lemon

AUDA' "fee" is high enough compared to the rest of the world such as .com

http://www.opensrs.com/blog/2010/06/our-reseller-friendly-approach-to-pricing/

 

[DomainNames]

Unfortunately DomainNames you are wrong. Your suggestions of who would support second level registrations couldn't be further from the truth.

While I don't know the auDA position I have found almost no support from registrars and resellers and hostility from lawyers to the idea.

However international experience shows registrants love the idea.

As for my proposals, can you re-read them if you want to engage me debating them. You haven't understood them. My proposal would be the only registrants that could initially apply for seek.au, your example, would be registrants for seek.com.au and seek.net.au, and maybe registrants in other 2LDs.

As for confusion - there have been quite a few registries that have introduced registrations at the second level when originally registrations were only available at the third level. Do you really think Australians are stupider than Austrians, Koreans, Chinese and Japanese, to name but a few?

As for your closing sentence, "...continually pushed by some who wants to gain from it", I presume where you wrote "some" you mean "someone" and are inferring I have something to gain from it. I have nothing to gain from any change or keeping the status quo.

Ok David so how much should people who own the .com.au have to pay to also protect themself in buying a new extension .au?

If you own realestate.com.au how much would you be charged to buy the new extension realestate.au under your plan if you are on the board?

Will AUDA give you the name free? if not why not? It would be easy to just allocate all existing .com.au owners with the equivalent .au FREE as well but Im sure they wont do it... why not? Because they and the registrars want the added revenue or releasing .au... who knows AUDA may even want to auction them??

If you are elected on the board and the .au comes into reality what will you vote for? Will you allow free .au to all existing .com.au owners or will you vote for them having to pay again for the added .au to protect themself? The word blackmail comes to mind....people will be forced to pay to buy the .au and possibly at any price auda or the registrar etc wants for it. Hopefully the legal teams from many organisations such as Fairfax Media who own 30,000+ domain names via www.omg.com.au will fight the non needed release of .au. Imagine if they needed to go and pay for an additional 30,000 .au name equivalents of their .com.au domain name portfolio... they wont be happy.. but AUDA and some registrar would be ( who make money from every registration and renewal)

Its good to know what you stand for as a candidate and what you will do if voted onto the board at the next election so hope you dont mind these policy questions which do affect everyone .

 

[Lemon]

AUDA' "fee" is high enough compared to the rest of the world such as .com

http://www.opensrs.com/blog/2010/06/our-reseller-friendly-approach-to-pricing/

Those prices are for 1 year which would make the .com registry fee $14.68 compared to auDA $11.

Anyway forget I even mentioned it. Just an idea.

 

[DomainNames]

Those prices are for 1 year which would make the .com registry fee $14.68 compared to auDA $11.

You are missing the ausregistry fee ( registry) which is on top of the auda fee.

 

[David Goldstein]

As I said DomainNames, I would like to see a scenario that would allow registrants to have BOTH the second and third level domains at the price of the one domain for a period, such as five years.

After that, if there was a benefit to having both I think the registrant should pay for both.

I would also support some form of tightening up the existing 2LDs, with grandfathering of existing registrations. I don't envisage registrants would get much value from having both, especially domainers.

For example, in .AT where registrations are open to all and sundry from anywhere in the world, as I mentioned before, 97% of registrations are at the second level, about 2% for co.at domains and 1% for or.at domains.

In .CN I believe there has been a similar move, but CNNIC have stopped adding registration numbers, and have wiped the detailed historical record.

However using the Wayback Machine, going to http://web.archive.org/web/20101020060421/http://cnnic.net.cn/html/Dir/2003/12/13/2020.htm, you can see what happened for .CN.

Second level registrations appear to have been introduced in March 2003 and grew to 3,777,532 in September 2010, peaking at 9,292,072 in February 2009.

Com.cn statistics show that in March 2003 there were 145,719, peaking at 3,726,056 also in February 2009 and since declining to 1,787,448 in September 2010.

I don't know what policy restrictions there are in .CN, but it is obvious registrants prefer the option to register at the second level when given the choice.

 

[DomainNames]

As I said DomainNames, I would like to see a scenario that would allow registrants to have BOTH the second and third level domains at the price of the one domain for a period, such as five years.

After that, if there was a benefit to having both I think the registrant should pay for both.

I would also support some form of tightening up the existing 2LDs, with grandfathering of existing registrations. I don't envisage registrants would get much value from having both, especially domainers.

For example, in .AT where registrations are open to all and sundry from anywhere in the world, as I mentioned before, 97% of registrations are at the second level, about 2% for co.at domains and 1% for or.at domains.

In .CN I believe there has been a similar move, but CNNIC have stopped adding registration numbers, and have wiped the detailed historical record.

However using the Wayback Machine, going to http://web.archive.org/web/20101020060421/http://cnnic.net.cn/html/Dir/2003/12/13/2020.htm, you can see what happened for .CN.

Second level registrations appear to have been introduced in March 2003 and grew to 3,777,532 in September 2010, peaking at 9,292,072 in February 2009.

Com.cn statistics show that in March 2003 there were 145,719, peaking at 3,726,056 also in February 2009 and since declining to 1,787,448 in September 2010.

I don't know what policy restrictions there are in .CN, but it is obvious registrants prefer the option to register at the second level when given the choice.

Thanks David

FYI .cn was open to anyone in the world but .com.cn is for registered china entities only. This is whats caused chaos with their registrations in China. Its also been the same problems with .com.hk and .hk and .sg and .com.sg . I speak from experience as someone who had to register a brand name globally with different country extensions at great expense and red tape paperwork!

allowing the new unnecessary extension of .au will be a minefield and stuff up an exisiting fairly good Australian commercial domain name system ( which still needs some improvement)

Why exactly is the new additional domain name extension .au needed David in your mind?

 

[David Goldstein]

It's not "needed" but it will be preferred by all registrants once implemented. Obviously registrants prefer it. And as I wondered before - why do large companies such as Telstra and ANZ choose to use .COM in Australia? The length of domain probably.

 

[NicMason.com]

Hi all,
...

As some of you know, I am a candidate at the upcoming auDA board election.

...

If elected I would like to pursue some of the issues I was supporting on the recent Names Policy Panel, and also on the Names Policy Panel in 2007. These include reviewing the relevance of the close and substantiation rule, registrations at the second level and opening up registrations of .AU domains on a wider scale.

...

I am more than happy to discuss any of these issues further if anyone wishes, either here, by email (david@goldsteinreport.com) or phone (0418 228 605).

...

Hi David, and welcome!

Just wondering what your stance is on these issues?

Do you have a statement of your policies?

Cheers,

Nic

 

[DomainNames]

It's not "needed" but it will be preferred by all registrants once implemented. Obviously registrants prefer it. And as I wondered before - why do large companies such as Telstra and ANZ choose to use .COM in Australia? The length of domain probably.

No the reason Telstra and ANZ got the .com in addition to their .com.au was less red tape in application, cheaper price, brand protection, Type in traffic protection and global presence.

They also own telstra.com.au and anz.com.au so the fact is if you can afford it you buy both the .com.au and .com.

Sorry David your argument for an additional unneeded .au extension addition to the already functioning .com.au, .net.au, .org.au, .id.au, .gov.au makes no sense still.

If you get .au passed I can see AUDA releasing it and then spending millions advertising it...... more dollars wasted... more confusion for end users... more domain disputes... but more money for AUDA and more money for registrars with all the new renewals ( there is NO way AUDA would give them Free to anyone.. if they do great.. But they wont.. and why charge in 2 or 5 years later... thats still unfair and shows a reason of a money grab plan ).

Its good questions like these are answered by Candidates. It makes it easier who to vote for when we know what candidates stand for. Thank you anyway for taking time to put forwad your position on this issue. ...

Wonder what the other candidates think of another new extension for Australia and why they want it or dont want it?

2 options might only work

1. dont have a new .au extension
2. have the new extension of the .au and give all .com.au owners the equivalent .au FREE for the same period they own the .com.au

There are registrars and resellers who want it as they do think it will be a gold mine for new renewals for them! Some might deny it but its pretty obvious from some who are pushing for it.

 

[David Goldstein]

DomainNames,

You don't read what I write. I was commenting on why they use the domains, not what domain names they register.

As for your assertions on what would happen if registrations at the second level were made available, there is no international evidence to back up what you claim, and the international evidence supports my arguments.

David

 

[DomainNames]

DomainNames,

You don't read what I write. I was commenting on why they use the domains, not what domain names they register.

As for your assertions on what would happen if registrations at the second level were made available, there is no international evidence to back up what you claim, and the international evidence supports my arguments.

David

I read what you wrote but perhaps you wont admit any of your mistakes you have posted.... which is nearly every post it seems.

What are you talking about international evidence backs up your claims?? It opposes it actually! No use claiming it supports your views when it does not

Anyway.. thanks again for stating your position on some issues. Its now very obvious why we havent seem you on the forum before now.

A few more ...Whats your position on:

1. An open market for .com.au.. meaning anyone , any age, anywhere can register a domain name and sell it whenever they want ( same as .com rules)

2. Free Registrant Transfers ( existing registrant period used for the new owner) Same as .com rules

3. Three person panel for all disputes ( at no cost to registrant)

4. Registrant / defendant given 30 days to respond to all AUDA policy delete actions before the name is dropped

5. A free independent appeal body to review AUDA decisions.

6. What do you think of domainers?

7. Do you think its ok for an individual or entity to own 50, 1000, 2000, 30,000+ .com.au names? As many names as they want?

8. Is the monetisation policy needed? Why cant people buy and sell and do what they want with it when they want? ( same as .com rules)

9. Do you agree the 6 month prohibition on reselling should stay as policy? Did you ever support it?

 

[neddy]

Ok - please let me jump in here again.

There are some good questions being asked, and some good debate going on, but I think it is really important that we retain civility and keep it
from evolving into a slagging / slanging match. Also, if the thread becomes so long, we can all get lost in it!

There are a whole host of questions that have arisen in the past week.

So what I intend doing is compiling a short list of top questions, and then posting them into a separate thread. I will then ask each candidate
to give a short answer as to where they stand on each issue. I think that is a fair and pragmatic way to do it.

This way, we will all have a good snapshot of views that will enable us to determine our opinions. Does that sound sensible?

If anyone has any questions that they would like answered (that haven't been raised as yet), please let me know.

Cheers, Ned

 

[David Goldstein]

Sorry DomainNames or whoever you are... international experiences show that registrations at the second level are much more popular than registrations at the third level. I find it hard to believe you will find any evidence in any ccTLD that shows otherwise. I'm 99.99% certain you won't. You are wrong.

As for your questions, my answers are as follows:

1. Yes, with rules such as many ccTLDs use such as DENIC
2. More details on what you want - your "question" is not very clear
3. No, but open to suggestions to changes to existing procedures
4. Why do you need 30 days?
5. I'm happy to support an appeals process for auDA decisions, although not sure it should be free. I'd be concerned about vexatious serial complainers.
6. Domainers are as legitimate part of the domain name industry/business as any other
7. I can see no reason why an entity can't own as many domains as they want if they abide by registration policies. I wouldn't have supported this for the start-up of .AU, but now the market is mature it seems fine
8. Again, if you had read what I wrote, which you don't, you would have read I don't see the reason for having the close and substantiation rule, but that said, I don't see why there is a hang-up about .COM, it's other ccTLDs we should look at for best practice.

As for your stupid comment about why you haven't seen me here, it's the arrogance you display as to why people outside domainers don't want to get involved here. If you would engage in rational discussion you might find people such as board members and others would get involved. But all you really want is a closed shop with registration policies that suit you and anyone else's concerns are ignored.

 

[neddy]

Our posts obviously crossed.

Before this gets out of hand, please everyone read my last post.

It will really benefit everyone if we can engage in debate without acrimony.

 

[DomainNames]

Thanks Candidate David for your posts. Your posts prove a point that this vote for candidates is a crucial one for the Australian domain industry. Its hard to vote for somone who joins this forum just before the election and asks for votes .. even harder to vote for them after what you posted!! As a current board member responsible for many of the old policy problems and red tape this is why many here want to vote you out it seems

Sorry admin .. last post... wanted to give candidate David the chances to dig himself out of the hole but he never took the opportunities!! Many people here have considerable money invested in domain names and branding..... this vote and Policy rules affect everyone! Apologies if it got off track in anyway.

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

Domain Names raises some good points, one of which is very dear to me, a Registrant appeal mechanism.

I have been campaigning for this for a very long time (as I have been involved in Court cases where a simple appeal process could have avoided auDA spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal battles).

Finally auDA has introduced it with a fee of $750 (not that anyone knows about it) - but when I asked how many appeals they have had they said "oh um, none".

This process needs some changes to make it workable for example (1) it needs to be affordable, in most situations no one is going to spend $750 on a $500 domain name; (2) it needs to be accessible and more widely promoted. Until these changes are made it is in effect a non existent appeals mechanism.

 

[DomainNames]

Domain Names raises some good points, one of which is very dear to me, a Registrant appeal mechanism.

I have been campaigning for this for a very long time (as I have been involved in Court cases where a simple appeal process could have avoided auDA spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal battles).

Finally auDA has introduced it with a fee of $750 (not that anyone knows about it) - but when I asked how many appeals they have had they said "oh um, none".

This process needs some changes to make it workable for example (1) it needs to be affordable, in most situations no one is going to spend $750 on a $500 domain name; (2) it needs to be accessible and more widely promoted. Until these changes are made it is in effect a non existent appeals mechanism.

Awesome. This is one reason you will get many votes again. You offer people proper representation and you push for much needed policy changes with no excuses for bad policy. AUDA needs to make that appeals process known and need to make it more affordable. Keeping that appeals process option secret is not good! ....Strange some board members seem not to have known about it when asked