structure, basis, powers

This page looks at auDA's constitution, Board and membership structure, administration and challenges.

     basis

auDA, much like ICANN, is a private sector entity that is underpinned by national legislation, exercises quasi-governmental powers in developing and administering policy and faces questions about its legitimacy.

Ultimately its authority rests on support, tacit or otherwise, from the federal government and the extent to which it has secured the commitment of stakeholders that range from corporate intellectual property owners to groups that view the domain name system as an engine for winding back globalisation, the New World Order or other bugaboos.

Like ICANN it operates at the intersection of international and national law, business practice and technical standards. Many people misunderstand the interaction of those forces (one reason why we've provided guides on this site) or merely prefer to ignore inconvenient facts.

As Rebecca Nesson noted in relation to ICANN, "the level of engagement with the issues at hand does not deepen over time", with public discussion being characterised by "identical arguments regarding many of the same issues". More concisely, one observer of online debate about auDA has flagged that "liberal use of the F-word and ad hominem attacks - shout loudly, shout often - do not disguise the poverty of many arguments".

So far there's no major academic study of auDA, although several masters projects are underway. For a discussion of nongovernment organisations see the separate ICANN profile, Regulating The Global Information Society (London: Routledge 00) edited by Christopher Marsden, or the broader Constructing World Culture: International NonGovernmental Organizations Since 1875 (Stanford: Stanford Uni Press 99) edited by John Boli and Autonomous Policy-Making By International Organisations (London: Routledge 99) edited by Bob Reinalda. For a perspective on legitimacy in DNS administration see Jonathan Weinberg's feisty ICANN & the Problem of Legitimacy paper.

auDA operates under Australian company law (its corporate constitution is discussed below) as a nonprofit industry body. As part of the national 'co-regulatory' arrangements for telecommunication services its activities are subject to trade practices and telecommunications law.

In particular, the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment Act 2000 modified the Telecommunications Act 1997 (here) to provide a "safety net" with government intervention if necessary. Its constitution provides that if auDA is dissolved "the right to administer the .au ccTLD must either be transferred on to another entity nominated or approved by the Commonwealth of Australia or, in the absence of such approval, be transferred to the Commonwealth".

Although auDA is not government owned or controlled it was established under official auspices, was initially serviced by the National Office for the Information Economy (NOIE), and has been recurrently endorsed by the federal communications minister, having a closer relationship with government than other industry bodies.

     powers and constitution

auDA's constitution indicates that

taking the view that the Internet Domain Name System is a public asset, and that the .au ccTLD is under the sovereign control of the Commonwealth of Australia, auDA will administer the .au ccTLD for the benefit of the Australian community.

It is to ensure the continued operational stability of the domain name system (DNS) in Australia and establish mechanisms to ensure the DNS is responsive and accountable to the "supply and demand sides of the Australian Internet Community" ("those users and suppliers of services via the Internet who are based in Australia"), including

• promotion of competition and fair trading in the provision of domain name services
• promotion of consumer protection
• adoption of open, transparent and inclusive procedures

Its responsibility as "administrator of and self regulatory policy body" for the dot-au ccTLD (including 2LDs) encompasses action to:

• "maintain and promote the operational stability and utility of the .au ccTLD"
• ensure cost effective administration of the dot-au space
• develop and establish a policy framework that encompasses rules governing the operation of 2LD registries, creation of second level domains, accreditation of registrars and registry administrators, registration of names within 2LDs
• manage the operation of critical technical functions including dot-au name servers, zone files and the dot-au WHOIS database
• liaise with national and international bodies on issues relating to the development and administration of domain name systems
• establish appropriate complaints handling and dispute resolution processes.
  

     governance

The organisation is governed by a thirteen member board of directors, of whom 11 are to be elected by members (in three classes) and two are coopted. Elections are on a staggered basis, to prevent 'capture' by particular interests. Directors are elected as individuals rather than as representatives of an organisation. A list of current directors is here.

Membership is essentially open to organisations and individuals that satisfy basic eligibility requirements and are prepared to pay the $100 membership fee. There have been suggestions that any dot-au domain registrant (domain name 'owner') would be automatically eligible to become a member of the company, in line with practice in Canada. However, acceptance of the idea is uncertain.

There are three classes of membership - Supply, Representative and Demand - each with three directors. The members as a whole elect two directors.

The Supply class consists of domain registry administrators and domain registration service providers. The Representative Association class covers associations of at least 100 members, such as ISOC-AU. The Demand Class consists of any legal person that does not qualify for Supply Class membership. more than two additional board members for terms not exceeding two years.

The organisation has around 250 members, identified in a list here.

Criticism of auDA has been loud but often uninformed and arguably does not have substantial support among the internet industries or wider community. Few of the critics seem to have bothered to study the auDA documentation or respond to the organisation's calls for public comment on proposals. Two sites that appeared in the second half of 2001 are auDAWatch and the DNS Action Group (DNSAG).

     administration and resourcing

auDA currently operates from premises in Melbourne, with a staff of two, smaller than many counterparts. That potentially poses some difficulty when the entire office attends an ICANN meeting overseas.

It is currently dependent on membership fees, industry support(for example the AUNIC database is hosted gratis by a registration service provider) and work by its directors and advisers. If it is to operate effectively it will require greater funding and additional technical skills; the expectation is that auDA will set licence/accreditation fees and share in revenue relating to provision by other entities of domain-related services.

Despite grizzling from some sectors, where there's an expectation that standards can be articulated and implemented for free, revenue sharing is appropriate and is consistent with the practice of other industry self-regulatory bodies.

     participation

The organisation's made some effort to encourage community participation, with presentations at various fora and a 'DNS' discussion list (with around 300 subscribers). Overall, the major form of participation is through its two large advisory panels (discussed on the following page) and the smaller working group, which have sought public responses to particular proposals. The number of responses has generally been lower than the number of people on the panels. (auDA's archived a full set of submissions on its site; our submissions are here.)

The organisation faces a particular challenge in securing the support of interested bodies while introducing competition in the delivery of services and raising community awareness.

Overall, it has hitherto been reactive rather than engaging with the public at large and has had indifferent success in communicating its mission, accordingly being criticised as unrepresentative, ineffectual or not legitimate. Some of those criticisms are coalescing around redelegation of responsibility for the dot-au space, i.e. transfer from Robert Elz to auDA. They are likely to recur with the introduction of competition in coming months.





   next page  (activity)