More on the sale of

In an interesting turn of events in the sale of the domain.

The original post on the Now Hiring blog has been taken down, however the post is still available in Google’s cache.  In an email from Brett Iredale this morning he indicated that the post was removed at the request of a couple of the bidders as the process is still underway.  Brett indicated that he will most likely repost in a few days.

A comment made by Richard Ellender questioned if the domain name could even be sold.  I spent a quick bit of time researching this today and it looks like sale of a .au domain name is prohibited under the auDA rules, from section 2 from policy 2005-05:-

2.3 It is possible for a registrant to transfer their domain name licence to another party, but only in the circumstances set out in auDA’s Transfers Policy (Policy No 2004-03). A registrant who attempts to “sell” their domain name licence should be aware that such a transaction will not fall within the circumstances set out in the Transfers Policy, and therefore the domain name will not be transferred to the other party.

However the domain can be transferred as per policy 2004-03 section 3.1

(iii) where the registrant is a legal entity, the registrant is liquidated or enters into administration and the liquidator or administrator authorises the transfer of the domain name licence to the proposed new registrant; or


c) the transfer does not constitute a breach of the prohibition on sale of a domain name by a registrant (auDA Published Policy 2002-24).

I am sure lawyers have ways of getting around this, it’s not really a sale of the domain name, more its the “sale of the IP around the name oh and let’s also transfer it at the same time”.

12 thoughts on “More on the sale of

  1. The original ad in the Fin Review was offering to sell the right to register the domain (or words to that effect). The buyer would need to be eligible to register the domain. The rules are not strictly enforced by most registrars, although with a relatively high profile transaction like this they might be!

    Of course “jobsjobsjobs Limited” would have no problem with eligibility.

    It’s currently registered to the liquidators/administrators.

  2. You’re correct on the auDA rules, indeed they are full blown socialists, you never own a domain, you essentially lease the rights to use it, and Id think the sale of this domain will likely come to their attention. Of course auDA’s rules are wrong on so many levels, but who am I to change them alone 🙂

  3. Duncan wrote:

    You’re correct on the auDA rules, indeed they are full blown socialists, you never own a domain, you essentially lease the rights to use it

    How is this different from any domain name?

  4. It’s not different. What does differ here in Australia are the conditions pertaining to your eligibility to lease the domain in the first place and what you can do with the lease once you have it.

    The same restrictions don’t apply for almost all other domains. One positive effect of this is that many good domains are still available in Australia, that would not be available elsewhere in the world.

  5. What is the purpose of this website? It seems to me like a personal blog? A dotcomdotau name is supposed to be registered for “commercial purposes only”. If you call Google Ad banners commercial purpose then it would seem to me you are just in it to “monetize” the name. Rules for registration are broken everyday, and I think your case is worse than the way the other company has acquired

  6. Sam, interesting point. The domain was registered a few years ago as part of my move into independent consulting using a registered ABN, and company structure. As things happened I did not end up in consulting and right now the domain is housing my blog, however disabled in the WordPress admin are the consulting business pages.

    Not sure how this is worse than the other company, but you are right the rules are broken and bent all the time.

  7. Rules are made for broken 🙂 Especially if they are flawed to begin with. Incidentally, the auDA rules are currently being reviewed.

    So who has acquired for the domain ?

  8. Michael,

    If you’re still in Honkers you probably wouldn’t have seen it – but in the Fin Review today they say has been bought by, a domain monetization business – they produce those annoying sites that often appear in Google searches but they’re just a list of syndicated ads. I think they should be called para-sites 🙂

  9. Back from honkers, but I don’t tend to read the paper just wait for others to let me know the good things :-). I will now have to go get a copy and have a read.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: