From:           Rachel Clifford, WhatmankesNZ Ltd
Received:    27 September 2012

Question 1. Should the New Zealand domain name space be extended to allow registration at the second level, for example yourname.nz?
No
• Businesses may feel compelled to purchase these domain names
• Businesses may be compelled to update collateral and marketing material if.nz becomes the default in their industry, introduction of .nz gives rise to the potential for disputes over .nz addresses.

Question 2. Are there any other undertakings that the Domain Name Commission should make while developing/implementing the policy?
No Response

Question 3. Should new second level domains be created to cater for particular interest groups, such as .wine.nz or .sport.nz?
No

Question 4. Should new moderated second level domains be created to cater for domain names that require special protection, such as .bank.nz?
No

Question 5. Should the registration of some names such as .com.nz or .gov.nz, be prohibited at the second level to minimise potential confusion? What names, if any, should be prohibited?
Yes
similar to above and others that are just 1-2 letters different from existing addresses, we already have to have .co.nz and .com to ensure no copycat

Question 6. Do you agree with the rationale for the Sunrise Period that would enable existing .nz domain name holders first chance to register names at the second level? Why?
Agree
But there shouldn't be a cost ever, that is I don't think it should be allowed

Question 7. Who should be allowed to register a domain name at the second level when there are competing registrations at the third level?
Only owners of existing 1st level registration, for sake of protection,

Question 8. Assuming only persons with a conflicting third level domain name may apply, how should that conflict be resolved? By consent? Or some other mechanism?
No Response

Question 9. Should the Domain Name Commission consider extending its Dispute Resolution Service for a limited period to cover particular sub-domains when considering whether a name registered at the second level infringes a complainant’s rights?
Yes

Question 10. Is the approach as outlined in the proposed amended policy in Appendix C appropriate? Why?
No Response

Question 11. Are there any other comments you would like to make relating to this consultation?
No Response