[LINK] More Domain-Name Games?

[Roger Clarke]

I've just received an unsolicited letter from Domains Australia Pty 
Ltd, still advising at an imposing address in Collins St Melbourne.

It states that "the domain name www.xamax.com is currently available 
for registration", and offering to arrange registration for a 2-year 
period for $225 inc. GST.

I own xamax.com.au.  I've previously made enquiries about xamax.com. 
(But I was beaten to it by a Connecticut company.  They got it in Feb 
'95, the same month I launched my main site at the ANU, and a short 
while before I started planning to put my company up on the Web.  The 
word originated at a Francophone Swiss soccer-club, so I thought I'd 
be safe enough.  But I'm not the only foreigner who knows about 
Neuchatel.  Damn!).

I make no complaint about being approached to buy xamax.com.  (It's a 
business matter, not a personal one;  so privacy laws are arguably 
not relevant.  And there's an arguable case for reasonably inferred 
consent to approach me).

But what's interesting is that the CT company is still there, at:
http://www.xamax.com/

And the DNS entry is unequivocal (copy below) - "Record expires on 
28-Feb-2006 ... last updated on 3-Mar-2005".

The letter and envelope are undated, but arrived in the mail on 3 March.

A couple of thoughts come to mind:

(1)  is this outright fraud?  That was my first reaction.  But looking at
      the info above, there's a plausible defence.  So if it's fraud,
      then it's cleverly done

(2)  is it a smart business model, knowing who's interested in what
      information, monitoring for it, and communicating it when the
      opportunity arises?  There will be some leakage, because some of
      us know to check prices (especially those of us who own several
      domain-names);  but you don't have to get 100% conversion

(3)  how come they can monitor the DNS registry for this information?
      I sought a service years ago to advise me if and when the
      cybersquatted rogerclarke.com became available (due to the squatter
      getting bored and not renewing).  My request was refused.  (But I
      monitored it myself, and in due course got it).

      I understood that there were protections against bulk accesses to the
      registry, which is what this business model would require.

      Is my memory wrong?  Or has ICANN permitted Verisign to pull yet
      another fast one on the Internet community?



Registrant:
Xamax Inc (XAMAX-DOM)
    63 Silvermine Road
    Seymour, CT 06483
    US

    Domain Name: XAMAX.COM

    Administrative Contact:
       Weinberg, Martin  (MWB284)		m.weinberg at XAMAX.COM
       XAMAX Industries, Inc.
       63 Silvermine Road
       Seymour, CT 06483
       US
       (203) 888-7200 fax: (203) 888-1002

    Technical Contact:
       RCN  (27350792O)		abuse at RCN.COM
       105 Carnegie Center
       Princeton, NJ 08540
       US
       800-746-4726 fax: 999 999 9999

    Record expires on 28-Feb-2006.
    Record created on 27-Feb-1995.
    Database last updated on 3-Mar-2005 02:28:58 EST.

    Domain servers in listed order:

    NS1.MAGS.NET                 66.181.192.10
    NS2.MAGS.NET                 66.181.192.12

-- 
Roger Clarke              http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/
			            
Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd, 78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
                 Tel: +61 2 6288 1472, and 6288 6916
mailto:Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au            http://www.xamax.com.au/

Visiting Professor in the Baker Cyberspace Law & Policy Centre, UNSW
Visiting Professor in the eCommerce Program, University of Hong Kong
Visiting Fellow in Computer Science,  Australian National University