Question 1. Should the New Zealand domain name space be extended to allow registration at the second level, for example yourname.nz?
Top level domains are always very popular and would cause an increase in registrations under the NZ namespace.
Question 2. Are there any other undertakings that the Domain Name Commission should make while developing/implementing the policy?
Equivalent wholesale fees is good, encourages registrations.
Question 3. Should new second level domains be created to cater for particular interest groups, such as .wine.nz or .sport.nz?
There would be a very limited amount of registrants under these categories. Most of our customers like the main extensions. (.co.nz and upcoming .nz)
Question 4. Should new moderated second level domains be created to cater for domain names that require special protection, such as .bank.nz?
I don't think this would prevent a fake bank from registering under .co.nz.
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?
Absolutely, there is nothing worse than having to deal with 'fake' extensions. There are many that are unreliable and they are advertised as 'real' domains, confusing the public. Any known 'internet' extensions should be banned.
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?
Good way to generate income rapidly as well as protect current registrants.
Question 7. Who should be allowed to register a domain name at the second level when there are competing registrations at the third level?
Oldest creation date should have the first opportunity. I assume moderated domains are blocked from being registered in other extensions anyway?
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?
Oldest creation date should have the first opportunity. If both were created on the same day (unlikely) then proof of trademark or proof of use of domain name (website).
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?
Allows trademark holders the opportunity to dispute.
Question 10. Is the approach as outlined in the proposed amended policy in Appendix C appropriate? Why?
Question 11. Are there any other comments you would like to make relating to this consultation?