With auDA Director elections looming, I’d like to share with you how they do it in Canada. They are currently going through their election process, and I’m so impressed how they do it. Australia (auDA) could and should emulate some of their transparency. It is very refreshing.
As I wrote back in April:
“CIRA is their auDA. Membership is free if you are the holder of a domain. It is not automatically foisted on people – it is an opt in process by simply ticking a box. However, they do have approximately 15,000 members! And these members get informed of everything to do with the evolution and growth of the .ca space – and they ultimately get to vote on change. That’s the way it should be.“
CIRA’s Process
CIRA’s election process happens in several stages, beginning with filling seats on the nomination committee in April and ending in an online vote in September. You can read about the process here.
“At CIRA, we believe that Canadians have both the right to be informed about how the Internet develops, and a responsibility to act on it. Whether you use the Internet for work or play, you can influence the future development and direction of the Internet in Canada. Participating in CIRA’s governance is one way you can help build a better online Canada.”
- They clearly outline the options that members have if they want to participate in some way.
- I really like the idea of a nomination committee to sort out ideal candidates first. “Wheat from the chaff” etc.
- From candidate applications to the final vote, the entire election process is held online.
- They have an online forum over a one week period where individual candidates can be questioned as to their stances on various subjects. What a marvellous idea!
- One of my online friends from Canada is standing for election this year. Frank Michlick has been working fulltime in the domain industry since 2001; and is widely respected. It’s good to see an example of a succinct candidate statement on the election forum – plus an example of people making comments and asking questions. I wish Frank great success!
In the forum, one of the topics raised was “CIRA as a Membership Based Organization”. It’s worth a read of the comments. Even though CIRA have over 15,000 members, they still bemoan the fact that engagement with stakeholders is “challenging”. In Australia, we only have about 250 members in total – yet we have about a million more domains!
Thoughts and comments?
Disclaimer
CIRA is far more transparent and innovative compared to auDA and sadly many past and present auDA board members.
Every registrant of a Canada domain name is eligible to join as a member FREE. Seriously, compare 15,000 CIRA members against auDA’s 200 members!
Most things can be done online. auDA still struggles with red tape and manual paperwork. Come on this is the internet you have been promoting isn’t it?
No wasted money on lavish Christmas parties, giveway grants for friends or associates.
No wasted money on award nights which have nothing to do with the administration of domain names etc.
Great Reverse Domain Name Hijacking policy. auDA board members know about it so why is it not done in Australia the same yet?
Canada’s equivalent of the auDRP is the CIRA Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (‘CDRP’). Like the auDRP, the CDRP is largely based on the UDRP which provided the genesis of many administrative dispute processes around the world.
“Of particular note in clause 4.6 of the CDRP is the following:
Bad Faith of Complainant
If the Registrant is successful, and the Registrant proves, on a balance of probabilities, that the Complaint was commenced by the Complainant for the purpose of attempting, unfairly and without colour of right, to cancel or obtain a transfer of any Registration which is the subject of the Proceeding, then the Panel may order the Complainant to pay to the Provider in trust for the Registrant an amount of up to five thousand dollars ($5000) to defray the costs incurred by the Registrant in preparing for, and filing material in the Proceeding. The Complainant will be ineligible to file another Complaint in respect of any Registration with any Provider until the amount owing is paid in full to the Provider.”
Totally agree Sean
Don
@Sean – I really do like Canada’s RDNH policy.
In fact, they have so many things which we could adopt. After all, we are both members of the Commonwealth!
Well it is clear at least one enlightened member of auDA board and expert in IP Law and Domain law see’s the RDNH issue as being something auDA needs to change.
https://www.coopermills.com.au/reverse-domain-name-hijacking/
What is the hold up at auDA to make it happen and do what the CIRA did long ago?
It seems that there is a lot we can learn from the Canadians.
I’ve been fortunate enough not to have been involved in an auDRP case, but the idea of charging a fee to complainants found to have engaged in RDNH is a great one.
CIRA is definitely a model for how other ccTLD registries should operate. They should start a consulting arm imo.