Australian Internet Domain Names Licensing Review

Greetings from the .au Licensing Rules Review consultation in Canberra. auDA is a not for profit organization with a legislated license to administer Internet domain names which end in .au 

auDA will be holding face to face consultations in Brisbane, Sydney & Melbourne, with online consultations as well. auDA is keen to get input. I offered to help by coming up with controversial proposals, such as dutch auctions for domain names: you want the name, you bid the most first, you get it. ;-)

I am here because one of the auDA board suggest I come along. I was a member of the "Internet Cabal" some decades ago, but have not had much to do with it since, apart from paying my domain registration.

There is no proposal for changes, but key issues the panel has identified in the discussion paper are:

1. Domain name monetisation
2. Allocation rules for com.au and net.au
3. Contested .au direct domain names
4. Bad faith and scam registrations
5. Complaint processes
6. Alignment of the .au Licensing Rules with global best practice
7. Anything else

As an example of an issue, companies can make money selling domain names for whatever they think the buyer will pay. Through auDA the public only gets a small fixed amount of this. Perhaps, like mining royalties, there should be a share, based on value, going to the public. 

Another tricky issue is that not-for- profit domain names can't be profited from. But exactly what is not for profit can be unclear. What was interesting was that those presented and others attended searched for analogies to use to understand the unfamiliar and abstract nature of domain names. One used was land speculating. Following this discussion my suggestion of dutch auctions doesn't seem so odd. Perhaps the stock markets providing another analogy.

There was a review in 2018 and changes were made. 

Australia-Taiwan relations: Policy options and priorities for engagement

Greetings from the launch of the USSC report Australia-Taiwan relations: Policy options and priorities for engagement . This is a timely report, given the uncertain geopolitical situation in our part of the world. This afternoon I drafted my presentation for Australian Defense Tech Hackathon, which starts tomorrow. In my presentation I make the point that senior military people look at what universities produce, be it strategic analysis or new drones. 

 The SSSC report recommends stronger economic ties with Taiwan. They also recommend improving understanding of  Australia's One-China Policy. This is a difficult task, as the policy is deliberately ambiguous and contradictory. The report recommends "Operationalise Australia’s whole-of-government approach to deterrence", which sounds like mobilisation for war.

There are perhaps areas Australia can co-operate with Taiwan on defence and industry. Australia has drone submarine and aircraft projects proceeding well with US companies. However there are no armed vehicle or surface vessel equivalents. Perhaps they could be developed with Taiwan. I asked the panel and they suggested the Australian government could  encourage company to company dual use projects. This is a way to avoid upsetting China too much. I guess the projects could be a rugged robot off-road vehicle suitable for mining and an uncrewed offshore windfarm support vessel. The vehicle would be able to carry shipping container size fuel tank which can refuel mining trucks automatically, and also drone aircraft. The ship coul repair wind farms automatically and also rearm submarines.