On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, David Jones wrote:

[generics]

> You may as well aboilish the Eligibility policy because now it adversely 
> affects those who wish to register a domain but not to monetise it. The 
> only criteria that should exist is that you are an Australian business 
> or citizen.

Precisely - if this sort of abuse continues then a large proportion of 
generics will be monetised, and anyone who actually wants to establish a 
business using a generic domain name will be out of luck, unless they wish 
to purchase it from the current monetiser (which really shows that they 
are cybersquatting - see 4.5 below).

So either auDA cracks down on this sort of abuse, or it should just open 
up the open 2LDs to anyone. As a side note, I see dwarfs.com.au is now a 
blank page, so having lost the income from their illegitimate 
monetisation, and unless the registrant comes up with something actually 
related to dwarfs, they'll let it expire in two years when it can be 
reused by anyone with a legitimate use for it.

James Andrewartha

http://auda.org.au/policies/auda-2006-03/

4.2 In addition to their obligations under auDA Published Policies and the 
Registrant Agreement (domain name licence), domainers must comply with the 
following conditions of use:

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

b) the domain name must not be an entity name, personal name or brand name 
in existence at the time the domain name was registered.

4.3 The condition in paragraph 4.2a) is intended to ensure that the close 
and substantial connection between the domainer and the domain name is 
visible and meaningful to users. If the content of a monetised website 
does not relate to the domain name in any discernible way, then the 
domainer is not providing the service described in paragraph 4.1 and the 
close and substantial connection rule is not satisfied.

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.

4.5 The condition in paragraph 4.2b) is intended to ensure that domain 
monetisation is not used as a cover for cybersquatting or other misleading 
or fraudulent activity.