[LINK] What's in a (domain) name?

[Nick Smith]

re: this 'individuals and the domain names they can and can't have'
business.

Imagine if Yang and Filo had been Australian grad students avoiding
finishing their PhD by building a web directory. 
'No, you can't have www.yahoo.com.au but you can have www.jerryyang.id.au'. 

Yahoo.com began as hobby, non-trade-marked and unincorporated. Today it's
supposed to be the web's most valuable brand.

Nick

--
=========================================================
Nick Smith
Executive Officer  ::  Australian Digital Alliance  
Copyright Advisor  ::  Australian Libraries Copyright Committee
PO Box E202   \\   Kingston ACT 2604
Ph: 02 6262 1273   \\   Fax: 02 6273 2545
Email: nsmith@nla.gov.au   \\   Web: www.digital.org.au
=========================================================

> ----------
> From: 	Ian Johnston[SMTP:ian.johnston@infobrokers.com.au]
> Reply To: 	ian.johnston@infobrokers.com.au
> Sent: 	Thursday, 16 November 2000 17:12
> To: 	link@www.anu.edu.au
> Subject: 	RE: [LINK] What's in a (domain) name? 
> 
> Irene
> 
> Your points are well taken.  It seems to me you have made a persuasive
> case.
> 
> I'll refer your email to the Panel's members for consideration and any
> comment back to you at this stage.
> 
> Ian Johnston
> Member, auDA Names Policy Advisory Panel
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-link@www.anu.edu.au [mailto:owner-link@www.anu.edu.au]On
> > Behalf Of Irene Graham
> > Sent: Thursday, 16 November 2000 2:52 PM
> > To: link@www.anu.edu.au
> > Subject: Re: [LINK] What's in a (domain) name?
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:19:03 +1100 "Ian Johnston"
> > <ian.johnston@infobrokers.com.au> wrote:
> > [...]
> > >Fair point Nick.  Your example raises a number of issues which the
> Panel
> > >considered and, indeed, developed proposals for public comment.
> >
> > But, I think the principle point at issue is being missed. Nick's
> example
> > of "giraffe" is inadvertently too readily related to the separate issue
> of
> > generic words.
> >
> > I think the point Nick was trying to make is that at present an
> Australian
> > individual cannot get a .au domain name that is not related to their
> real
> > name. Why should this be so?
> >
> > If an Australian individual wishes to establish a web site about, for
> > example, their hobby, why should they be restricted to using
> > their own name
> > for it?
> >
> > Individuals cannot register, eg: libertus.***.au, or, in event that
> could
> > be claimed to be "generic", even "aboutcensorshipinAustralia.***.au
> (not
> > that anyone would prob. want such a long domain name, but I trust
> > the point is made)  in _any_ Oz domain, without also paying to register
> >  a business name or something first.
> >
> > Hence, we give our money to the Christmas Islands or the USA, or
> someplace
> > else, notwithstanding that we may in fact prefer to have a .au domain
> and
> > in fact it may be more appropriate. Hence, there is now a "libertus.net"
> > site, about censorship in Australia! The current .au policies seem
> > ridiculous to me and have no sensible justification that I've been able
> to
> > identify.
> >
> > Australian individuals are basically regarded as non-existent in context
> of
> > being able to establish a domain in Australia, merely because they are
> not
> > commercial nor a registered "organisation" or "association" and *.id.au
> > also requires use of real name - not to mention that one would
> > also have to have emu, wombat or something similar in it.
> >
> > Irene
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Irene Graham, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. PGP key on h/page.
> > Web: http://libertus.net - about censorship & free speech in Australia.
> > Executive Director, Electronic Frontiers Australia:
> http://www.efa.org.au
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>