🚀 go-pugleaf

"David Bromage" <dbromage@fang.omni.com.au> wrote in message
news:3B451439.C2C2E22B@fang.omni.com.au...
> Does anybody know if the full regional domain names proposal is
> available to the public?

Under the .com.au domain the rules are (supposedly) quite clear. Technically
you can't have a domain name based on the name of a location unless you are
a local council etc. Like most of the .com.au naming policy, it's gots
inconsistencies and flaws that really need to be challenged. Just think
about how places are named, theoretically almost any word could be a place
name.

> The proposal is that locality names should be
> available free to local counsils and reflect their location by state.

Look for a court case regarding the domain brisbane.com.au. The city of
Brisbane were unable to get it from a company that had previously registered
it, which shows how the naming policy can be over-ridden by the courts (much
to MelbourneITs disgust).

> For example, newcastle.nsw.au could not be registered by anybody other
> than the City of Newcastle.

Theoretically but see above. What if I had a company name of Newcastle Pty
Ltd?

>
> The US has a similar system under the *.us domain.
>
> There has been a lot of concern about domains with locality names being
> sold by cybersquatters.

According to AUDA and MelbourneIT the sale of domain names is banned. The
only way in which you could buy an existing domain is to purchase the
company that holds it (which is being done).

Of course, you realise that there is a move towards "open competition" for
domain names. I suspect AUDA and/or Melbourne IT plan to act as the
auctioneer of names and take their cut.

The Raven

The Raven wrote:
> "David Bromage" <dbromage@fang.omni.com.au> wrote in message
> news:3B451439.C2C2E22B@fang.omni.com.au...
> > Does anybody know if the full regional domain names proposal is
> > available to the public?
> Look for a court case regarding the domain brisbane.com.au. The city of
> Brisbane were unable to get it from a company that had previously registered
> it, which shows how the naming policy can be over-ridden by the courts (much
> to MelbourneITs disgust).
> 
> > For example, newcastle.nsw.au could not be registered by anybody other
> > than the City of Newcastle.
> 
> Theoretically but see above. What if I had a company name of Newcastle Pty
> Ltd?

Then you could get newcastle.com.au, but you couldn't get
newcastle.nsw.au.

Anybody could get boston.com if it was free, but you couldn't get
boston.ma.us

Cheers
David

"David Bromage" <dbromage@fang.omni.com.au> wrote in message
news:3B4550B0.4B630431@fang.omni.com.au...
> The Raven wrote:
> > "David Bromage" <dbromage@fang.omni.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:3B451439.C2C2E22B@fang.omni.com.au...
> > > Does anybody know if the full regional domain names proposal is
> > > available to the public?
> > Look for a court case regarding the domain brisbane.com.au. The city of
> > Brisbane were unable to get it from a company that had previously
registered
> > it, which shows how the naming policy can be over-ridden by the courts
(much
> > to MelbourneITs disgust).
> >
> > > For example, newcastle.nsw.au could not be registered by anybody other
> > > than the City of Newcastle.
> >
> > Theoretically but see above. What if I had a company name of Newcastle
Pty
> > Ltd?
>
> Then you could get newcastle.com.au, but you couldn't get
> newcastle.nsw.au.
>
> Anybody could get boston.com if it was free, but you couldn't get
> boston.ma.us

Now that would make sense but councils should really be using the .gov.au
domain as they are  government departments.

The Raven

The Raven wrote:
> Now that would make sense but councils should really be using the .gov.au
> domain as they are  government departments.

True, but the council name and the locality name usually only coincide
with large cities. 

Take, for example, the Mitchell Shire in Victoria. They already have
mitchellshire.vic.gov.au, but they might also want domains for
locatilies within the shire, e.g. broadford.vic.au, kilmore.vic.au and
seymour.vic.au

Cheers
David

"David Bromage" <dbromage@fang.omni.com.au> wrote in message
news:3B456790.AD335934@fang.omni.com.au...
> The Raven wrote:
> > Now that would make sense but councils should really be using the
.gov.au
> > domain as they are  government departments.
>
> True, but the council name and the locality name usually only coincide
> with large cities.
>
> Take, for example, the Mitchell Shire in Victoria. They already have
> mitchellshire.vic.gov.au, but they might also want domains for
> locatilies within the shire, e.g. broadford.vic.au, kilmore.vic.au and
> seymour.vic.au

Then why not get them as .gov.au, it's not like any joe off the street is
going to beat them to it? As locality names are restricted under most domain
types anyway there shouldn't be a problem in the first place............

--
The Raven
** Undisputed President of the ozemail.* NG's
** Conqueror of the uunet.* NG's

The Raven wrote:
> > Take, for example, the Mitchell Shire in Victoria. They already have
> > mitchellshire.vic.gov.au, but they might also want domains for
> > locatilies within the shire, e.g. broadford.vic.au, kilmore.vic.au and
> > seymour.vic.au
> 
> Then why not get them as .gov.au, it's not like any joe off the street is
> going to beat them to it?

Because there is no local government with, for example, the name
Broadford in it.

In the UK, localities are entitled to use the .org.uk domain, but county
councils get .gov.uk.

Cheers
David

"David Bromage" <dbromage@fang.omni.com.au> wrote in message
news:3B4BC97A.306D3F3A@fang.omni.com.au...
> The Raven wrote:
> > > Take, for example, the Mitchell Shire in Victoria. They already have
> > > mitchellshire.vic.gov.au, but they might also want domains for
> > > locatilies within the shire, e.g. broadford.vic.au, kilmore.vic.au and
> > > seymour.vic.au
> >
> > Then why not get them as .gov.au, it's not like any joe off the street
is
> > going to beat them to it?
>
> Because there is no local government with, for example, the name
> Broadford in it.

You (supposedly) can't register a domain using a geographic name under the
com.au space. Presumably, the same goes for .gov.au and .edu.au. So, no-one
could register that geographic name under those domain spaces.

As .gov.au isn't run by AUDA and MelbourneIT their rules don't apply.
Presumably, the .gov.au domain is run by some government department with
their own rules, and they could theoretically allocate that name to whoever
they choose. Logically, I'd assume that such a domain name would be
allocated to some body with:

a. legitimate access to the .gov.au domain space
b. Some association with the name "broadford"

>
> In the UK, localities are entitled to use the .org.uk domain, but county
> councils get .gov.uk.

Who is defined as being the entity representing a "locality"? It must have a
definition as you could end up with two groups claiming to be
representatives of a locality.

Introducing state based domain spaces for local, state, federal government
(and whatever sub-groups) would make sense if they came under .gov.au. (eg.
broadford.nsw.gov.au). This is controllable as the amount of names used more
manageable than allowing state identifiers in, say, .com.au

I don't claim to have the answers but I don't think the government
understands the problem and the  domain administrators really have no
interest beyond making money.

--
The Raven
** Undisputed President of the ozemail.* NG's
** Conqueror of the uunet.* NG's

The Raven wrote:
> You (supposedly) can't register a domain using a geographic name under the
> com.au space. Presumably, the same goes for .gov.au and .edu.au.

You can if the geographic name happens to coincide with the institution
name, e.g. adelaide.edu.au, ballarat.edu.au, canberra.edu.au,
newcastle.edu.au.

> > In the UK, localities are entitled to use the .org.uk domain, but county
> > councils get .gov.uk.
> 
> Who is defined as being the entity representing a "locality"? It must have a
> definition as you could end up with two groups claiming to be
> representatives of a locality.

There are borough councils and other local authorities within counies.
 
> Introducing state based domain spaces for local, state, federal government
> (and whatever sub-groups) would make sense if they came under .gov.au. (eg.
> broadford.nsw.gov.au). This is controllable as the amount of names used more
> manageable than allowing state identifiers in, say, .com.au

It doesn't alter the fact that the locality is not an arm of local
government.
 
Cheers
David