There are only 375 people registered to this list. how far is a 'consumer 
alert' going to get.
auDA should be responsible for stopping misleading scams by policy.

Authorised registrar's should be the only organisations which can issue 
domain name registrations and renewals, direct to the customer. 
resellers/affiliates should have to state who their authorised registrar 
is  this should be auDA enforced policy, no disclaimer, no domain. 
registrars would have to enforce this policy.

there is not a monopoly. If an affiliate or whatever you want to assign it 
is selling domain names on a authorised registrar's behalf, that registrar 
should be obliged to ensure that the organisation which is selling domains 
on their behalf complies with the auDA policy. no acceptations. if an 
affiliate does do something wrong, the registrar associated with that 
affiliate should be responsible for sorting out the problem.

auDA make the rules. Authorised registrars are the only organisation from 
which domains can be registered ultimately. the registrar's have signed up 
to comply with the auDA policy and are charged with enforcing it opon 
whoever or whatever uses their services.

if this is not the case, what's to stop an Authorised registrar from 
getting a mate to sturt up a shelf company, setup a scam and then close 
down, there are no repercussions for the authorised registrar, even though 
there is a relationship between the scammer and the registrar.

this is a clear cut issue, auDA have the responsibility and the authority 
to impose rules on authorised registrars, after all they are authorised. 
there is not such thing as an unauthorised registrar, and if there were 
uregister would be classes as unauthorised and should have to announce 
that they are not an authorised registrar and hold no authority, or they 
do not get any domains registered - that simple.

again , what's the point of being authorised - if you are not you can pull 
scams and have no repercussions and make more money than the authorised. 
simple solution, enforce a policy of if you register domains on behalf of 
a organisation which has been identified by auDA as dodgy, that authorised 
registrar may have its authorised registrar status revoked. there would 
however have to be an adjudication process.

If there was an organisation which is in reseller, affiliate status - if 
it was serious and was ethical, surely they would be intending in the 
future to become an authorised registrar.

basically make it that authorised registrars enforce rules on the 
affiliates/resellers to comply with the same rules as the authorised 
registrars and if they don't the authorised registrars are not allowed to 
do any transactions with that affiliate/reseller. simple as that. if the 
authorised registrar continues to work with the dodgy affiliate/reseller, 
then auDA reserves the right to revoke the resellers authorised status.

do this and the industry will clean itself up.

 




Jon Wrote:-
>Yeah lets reintroduce the monopoly and centralise as much as possible. 
Competition
>is bad.  Oh yeah and lets nationalise the banks while we're at it.


>-- Original Message --
>Reply-To: dns§lists.auda.org.au
>From: "John Thomson" <john&#167;hep10.com>
>To: <dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au>
>Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2003 20:41:16 +1000
>Subject: RE: [DNS] Consumer Alert
>
>
>Well Ron just effectively solved the whole problem. That's a great idea.
>
>John
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ron Stark [mailto:ronstark&#167;businesspark.com.au]
>Sent: Thursday, 6 March 2003 8:32 PM
>To: 'dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au'
>Subject: RE: [DNS] Consumer Alert
>
>
>Time I woke up and stuck my oar in with something I've raised before.
>
>The solution is really easy - follow the car registration route, in which
>the number plate is analogous to the domain name.
>
>Allow resellers to sell the *initial* registration, with a reasonable
>mark-up; after all, domain names are usually sold as an adjunct to other,
>higher value, services.  Just like the number plate comes with the car.
>
>All renewals are then done at a *lower* rate, and solely through a 
central
>authority, or at worst, solely through only accredited registrars.  Just
>like car registration renewals.
>
>All of the spam around renewals will stop - there and then.  All of the
>effort will then go into *new* business development, which is great for
all
>of us.
>
>Ron Stark
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: John Thomson [mailto:john&#167;hep10.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, 6 March 2003 8:55 PM
>>To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>>Subject: RE: [DNS] Consumer Alert
>>
>>
>>I don't like being cynical but nobody is going to clean the 
>>Industry up. It
>>is only a matter of time before some Gold Coast company is set up to
>>telemarket to existing businesses for their domain renewal 
>>business. Why?
>>Simply it is an easy sell. The fear of losing a domain name 
>>will make them
>>easy prey and all they have to do is sign a simple form. Its 
>>virtually a one
>>call sell system. If any of you have telemarketing experience that
>>translates to fairly easy money for the right operator.
>>
>>The only effective way to control it is via a controlling 
>>entity that has
>>power to hit them hard and fast. Auda is not that entity at 
>>this stage. It
>>is a toothless tiger. Yes a warning! Stop or I'll say stop 
>>again. Scary! I
>>agree with Richard but won't be holding my breath for it to happen. My
>>advice is get used to scammers but stop blaming the wrong 
>>people. There has
>>barely been a mention of uregister but poor old bottle has 
>>copped heaps. It
>>doesn't make sense to me. It is up to Auda to say to uregister you have
>>breached our policy guidelines you have 14 days to show why 
>>you shouldn't be
>>closed down.
>>
>>That's not going to happen. Until it does focus your writing 
>>on making Auda
>>into a tiger with bite and get off bottles back. Has uregister 
>>covered this
>>scam in their domain warning system? I bet not. They don't even use
>>Australian hosting services so we should all be hammering them. Support
>>Australian businesses and promote fair trading for all.
>>
>>Getting off my soapbox now. Flame away.
>>
>>John
>>www.hep10.com
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Richard Archer [mailto:rha&#167;juggernaut.com.au]
>>Sent: Thursday, 6 March 2003 6:37 PM
>>To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>>Subject: Re: [DNS] Consumer Alert
>>
>>
>>
>>>However I will raise this general point again.  Walking away from
>>>organisations who have breached auDA policy in the past (as a lot of
>>>them have, all be it minor), is the easy way out.
>>
>>What a cop out. Get some backbone and do some hard yards to clean
>>up the industry on which you depend for your livelihood.
>>
>>Not that it should be an option. AuDA should be onto you like the
>>proverbial ton for supporting rot like this. Shows just what sort
>>of a job they're doing.
>>
>>
>>>It's very easy to wipe your hands of something that's dirty.  Not so
>>>easy to clean it.
>>
>>And it's even easier to stay dirty.
>>
>>I guess I'll just keep on looking forward to the next 20 junk mails
>>I'm going to get from some rogue operator who is then allowed to walk
>>off scott free with the profits from their little scam. And of course
>>the accredited registrar they use gets to keep their share. And auDA
>>gets their cut no matter what. And Ausregistry takes a slice.
>>
>>Everybody involved gets nicely rewarded from stuffing my PO Box with
>>dead trees. There's no incentive to clean up this nonsense is there?
>>


Jason Pay