--- Kirk Fletcher <kirk&#167;enetica.com.au> wrote:

> There's nothing to "crack down" on - monetisation,
> whether you
> personally like it or not, is a legitimate business
> practice and allowed
> under the policy (and rightly so).

I have nothing agains the practice of monetisation as
a business. 

However the majority of the domains registered under
the policy do not adhere to it. As a registrar you
should be aware of this and stop trying to exploit
loopholes.

The policy clearly states that

a) the content on a monetised website must be related
specifically and predominantly to the domain name;

the policy even goes on to give an example

4.4 A ?reasonableness test? is used to determine
whether the content on a monetised website satisfies
paragraph 4.2a), ie. would a reasonable person regard
the content as related specifically and predominantly
to the domain name? For example, a monetised website
at www.shoes.com.au would need to contain information
and advertising links about shoes and/or shoe
manufacturers and suppliers. If the website contained
information and advertising links about clothing in
general including shoes, then it would not be
acceptable under the close and substantial connection
rule. 


If you browse through any of the currently monetised
websites I can at most find 10% of content related
specifically to the domain name. If you think I am
wrong please point out how.

As I said it is just an excuse to abuse the australian
name space. And auDA should crack down on this
practice.


DJ




	
	
		
___________________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com