• Home
• .au Domains
• auDA Foundation
• .au Registry
• .au Registrars
• .au Policy
• About auDA
• auDA News
• Help

• Contact Us
• Glossary
• Privacy Policy
• Sitemap
• WHOIS

.au Policy

• auDA Published Policies
• Policy Reviews
• Panels and Committees
  • Industry Competition Advisory Panel
  • 2007 Names Policy Panel
  • Name Policy Review Panel
  • Registry Competition Review Panel
  • National Reference Group
  • Code of Practice Committee
  • New Names Advisory Panel
  • Name Policy Advisory Panel
  • Competition Model Advisory Panel
  • Dispute Resolution Working Group
• auDRP

NPAP Meeting - 27 June 2000

Present: Steve Fielding, Brandon Gradstein, Jan Gough-Watson (obo Evan Arthur), Odette Gourley, Rowan Groves, Tony Hill, Mark Hughes, Keith Inman, Ron Ipsen, Ian Johnston, Cheryl Langdon-Orr, Jo Lim, Geoff Morrison, Christine Page-Hanify, Cliff Reardon, Peter Reynolds, Leanne Schultz, Tony Serong (first half of meeting only), Cathy Thawley, Derek Whitehead, Ross Wilson, Michael Wolnizer

Teleconference: Philip Argy, Mark Davidson, Rory Ewins (obo Stuart Hamilton), Steve Pretzel, Josh Rowe, Galen Townson

Apologies: Sandra Davey, Kitty Davis, Ian Halliday, David Purdue, Daniel Rechtman

Actions:

1. DW and JL to draft minutes from meeting.
2. Panel to canvas issues via the closed list, starting with those identified in the Starting Points paper and those raised at the meeting. Moderate and summarise issues.
3. Panel to canvas the essential/desirable attributes of a domain name policy via the closed list, with the aim of establishing 6 key attributes that can be quantified or otherwise measured. Moderate and summarise attributes.
4. DW and JL to ask all 2LD registrars to provide a list of practical issues or problems regarding the application of current domain name policies.
5. JL to investigate possibility of setting up a password-protected area of the auDA web site for members only access to papers prior to panel meetings.
6. DW and JL to complete draft Stage 1 report (existing domain name policies).
7. OG to draft a short paper outlining the IP issues associated with domain name policy.
8. JL to draft a short paper outlining the regulatory environment for domain name policy in Australia.
9. DW and JL to start to develop a table of contents for the final Stage 2 report.

Decisions:

Proxies
1 Panel members are permitted to send proxies to meetings, but the proxy should be sufficiently briefed to ensure continuity of panel proceedings.

Confidentiality
2 Panel proceedings are confidential. Panel members are free to canvas, discuss and debate the issues outside panel meetings (eg. on the public list or other lists) but not to canvas the proceedings of the panel.

3 Panel papers are confidential until they are placed on the auDA web site or until the day after the meeting, whichever is sooner.

4 The panel chair will report to the auDA Board each month. The only official statements made on behalf of the panel will be by the chair. Panel members are free to speak about the work of the panel, but should make it clear that they are not speaking on behalf of the panel. Panel members may refer questions to the panel chair if appropriate.

Participation in meetings
5 Participation at meetings should be as equitable as possible, given that some members will be attending in person and some by telephone.

Location of meetings
6 Panel meetings will located alternately in Melbourne and Sydney, although consideration will be given to holding at least one meeting in Canberra.

Frequency of meetings
7 Panel meetings will be held on the last Tuesday of every month (except December) as follows:

Tuesday 27 June, Melbourne
Tuesday 25 July, Sydney
Tuesday 29 August, Melbourne
Tuesday 26 September, Canberra
Tuesday 31 October, Melbourne
Tuesday 28 November, Sydney
Tuesday 30 January 2001, Melbourne

Meetings may be cancelled if the business of a particular meeting can be as well dealt with another way. The September meeting may have to be cancelled due to the Olympic Games.

Consensus
8 Consensus is defined as a 2/3 majority. Whether this means a 2/3 majority of members as a whole, or a 2/3 majority of members present at a meeting, is yet to be determined. It has also not yet been determined whether proxies have voting rights.

There is an expectation that the panel will provide a single recommendation to the auDA Board. However, a significant minority opinion could also be presented to the auDA Board as part of the panel’s final report.

Documentation
9 Documentation for meetings will be circulated via the closed list by the chair and/or secretariat on the Friday preceding meetings. Panel members are free to circulate any documentation via the closed list at any time.

Papers will normally be circulated as Word attachments. Consideration will be given to posting non-confidential papers on a password-protected section of the auDA web site for members-only access prior to meetings.

All panel papers will be made publicly available on the auDA web site, unless the panel decides that a paper should remain confidential, in which case the minutes will record the existence of the paper.

Submissions
10 Submissions to the panel will be made public on the auDA web site unless clearly marked confidential. Confidential submissions will be made available to the panel only via the closed list.

Timetable
11 The Board has established indicative milestones which translate to the following timetable:

First meeting 27 June
Stage 1 working paper 25 July
Stage 2 draft working paper issued 31 October
Stage 2 report confirmed 30 January 2001

Discussion

1 Welcome and introductions
Panel members introduced themselves and gave a very brief outline of their interest and role in relation to domain name eligibility and allocation policies.

2 Operating issues and scope
There was a wide-ranging discussion of these areas. Decisions made are listed above.

3 Issues
The issues identified in the ‘Starting Points’ paper were acknowledged. Other issues raised by panel members at the meeting included:

• consistency versus differentiation - the need for a set of core, overarching principles with some specific rules for individual 2LDs
• trademarks - the need to minimise the conflict between trademarks and domain names, effect of different company structures on domain name eligibility
• well-known names - how should these be recognised and protected?
• user perspective - domain name policies need to take into account user requirements such as intuitiveness and useability
• domain name portability and reselling - users should be able to keep their domain name regardless of which ISP or registrar they use
• complaints procedures - what avenues for complaint currently exist, who uses them and how successful are they?
• dispute resolution - what type of dispute resolution mechanism(s) should be established? (NB - may be the subject of another auDA Advisory Panel)
• new 2LDs - should Australia introduce new 2LDs, and how does this relate to ICANN’s process for introducing new gTLDs? (NB - may be the subject of another auDA Advisory Panel)
• international best practice - what aspects of international domain name practice should Australia consider following?
• retrospectivity - should changes to domain name policies have retrospective effect?

The panel agreed to:

• canvas the issues via the closed list, with the aim of identifying a full set of issues for consideration at the next meeting; and
• canvas the essential/desirable attributes of domain name policy via the closed list, with the aim of establishing approximately 6 key attributes that can be quantified or otherwise measured.

The panel also requested two short background papers on IP issues and on the regulatory environment.