Hello Chris,

> 
> You will also be aware that auDA has issued 2 Consumer Alerts 
> earlier this
> year.
> 
> http://www.auda.org.au/alert_renewal.html
> 
> http://www.auda.org.au/alert_resellers.html

Melbourne IT strongly supports auDA in these consumer alerts and has sent
them to our retail customers in the past, and we will do so again.

> 
> We encourage all domain name re-sellers and ISPs to email 
> these to their
> customer database so that registrants are fully informed.
> 

Melbourne IT also supports this.

> 
> However, under the new competition regime, auDA will have the 
> power to do
> something about all of this. Our draft Registrars Agreement 
> has clauses in
> it making Registrars responsible for the behaviour of their 
> re-sellers and
> allowing auDA to instruct a Registrar to terminate a 
> re-seller Licence. It
> also contains provision ensuring that any Licence between an 
> Registrar and a
> re-seller contains various consumer safeguard clauses. 
> Interestingly, at the
> public meeting we held to discuss the draft agreement, Melbourne IT
> expressed the view that we should not be doing any of this.
> 
>

That last sentence is incorrect.

For a summary of the public meeting see:
http://www.auda.org.au/transition/comments/5-10mtg_record.pdf

The Melbourne IT comments were in relation to poor drafting of the
Registrars agreement which left the responsibilities of a Registrar
unbounded.  See the public comment relating to clause 15.3 and 15.5. 

We also strongly supported the original recommendation in the Competition
Panel report which stated:

Section 2.5.3:

"The Panel's view is that auDA should to have a role in regulating behaviour
at the reseller level, and registrars should be held responsible for
managing the behaviour of their resellers.  However, the Panel recognizes
that there should be mechanisms for auDA to intervene if a reseller is
engaging in conduct that is harmful to registrants or prospective
registrants,  The panel therefore recommends that auDA should require
registrars to include some minimum consumer safeguards and incorporate
industry code of practice in their agreements with resellers.   For example,
resellers should be required to disclose their relationship with a registrar
or registrars directly to registrants.  See Consumer Safeguards paper at
Attachment D for more detail"

The legal document has focussed on the first sentence of section 2.5.3, when
I believe the emphasis should be on the third sentence.  It is important
that the legal agreement not have open ended responsibilities.  For example
a registrar shouldn't be responsible for how resellers drive their cars, or
whether they defame people, or whether that complain about auDA.  A
registrar should be responsible for the resellers compliance with a consumer
safeguard policy and industry code of conduct developed by the industry with
wide consultation.  There are other laws (road traffic act, Trade Practices
act) and organisations available to enforce those laws (police, ACCC).  auDA
needs to limit its role more specifically in this agreement.

Melbourne IT seeks to work with auDA and all members of the industry to
ensure that we have a robust code of conduct.  Our view is it is not enough
to just refer to a code of conduct in the registrars agreement, it is
important to ensure sufficient input from the industry as a whole into a
code of conduct which can be complied with and supports ethical business
standards.

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin
 

--
This article is not to be reproduced or quoted beyond this forum without
express permission of the author. 314 subscribers. 
Archived at http://listmaster.iinet.net.au/list/dns (user: dns, pass: dns)
Email "unsubscribe" to dns-request§auda.org.au to be removed.