Public
Comments on the "Consultation Paper on the Review on Administration
and Assignment of Internet Domain Names and Internet Protocol Addresses
in Hong Kong"
| Reference
No. |
|
: |
|
DN13 |
| Date
of Submission |
|
: |
|
13.07.2000 |
| Submitted
by |
|
: |
|
Mr
Ron Cameron |
|
|
|
|
Head,
Trade Practices Division |
|
|
|
|
Consumer
Council |
Consumer
Council
Response to Consultation Paper
on the Review on Administration and Assignment of Internet Domain
Names and Internet Protocol Addresses in Hong Kong
Introduction
1.
The Consumer Council welcomes the move by the Government to review
the administration and assignment of Internet domain names (DN)
and Internet Protocol (IP) addresses in Hong Kong.
2.
At the outset, the Council wishes to express its general support
for the proposed structure of the administration and assignment
of Internet DN and IP. In particular, it welcomes the setting
up of a non-profit, non-statutory and self-financing entity to take
over the work currently undertaken by the Joint Universities Computer
Centre. The Council believes that the new arrangement will speed
up the development of e-commerce and play an important role for
Hong Kong when its consumers and businesses engage in electronic
commerce.
3.
The Council fully supports the view that applicants should avoid
infringing upon the intellectual property rights of a third party.
It also believes that reserving domain name consisting of well-known
international trademark, service marks and brand names as well as
some other restricted used names by the registration authorities
can impede cyber squatting.
4.
Although the Council agrees with the Government that prohibiting
legitimate transfer of domain names may be too restrictive, there
is no control mechanism in place to discourage the speculation over
domain names if it allows the transfer of domain names. The Council
urges that the proposed domain name administration body should consider
necessary steps to address this matter in future.
5.
The Council would also like to take this opportunity to recommend
certain safeguards to satisfy consumer protection, and competition
concerns.
Competition
and Consumer Safeguards
6.
The Council supports the view that the domain names should be registered
on a "first come. first served" basis and only companies and organizations
registered or incorporated in Hong Kong are allowed to register
domain names ending with .hk.
Selection
of registrar
7. The Council agrees with the Government's proposal that the existing
practice should continue in having a single domain name registrar
for the .hk domain name administration (except .gov.hk and .edu.hk).
However, the Council recommends that the Government consider using
the criterion of whoever can offer the lowest registration fee,
as the means to select the domain name registrar.
Registrar's
Agents
8. The Government has suggested that the registrar may engage agents
to perform some of the routine registration work, implying therefore
that there could be competition between multiple agents in providing
registration services. With the current exponential growth
in Internet activities, the need for multiple registrars is most
likely inevitable. In these circumstances, some recognition
should be given to the need for consumer and competition safeguards
in order that the market operates efficiently.
9.
For example, it is possible that some agents might misrepresent
their services in order to obtain unfair advantage over competitors,
even though they have signed an agreement to adhere to the same
set of registration practices and procedures as required by the
registrar. In addition, unless there is ongoing monitoring
of the sector, there may be a risk that in a rapidly changing environment,
particularly as the .hk domain could become a market in its own
right, that opportunities to correct market distortions might be
lost. This could result in the impairment of efficiency in
the sector, and industry structures that could make reforms difficult.
10.
The Council suggests that as a precaution, the registrar be given
the task of monitoring whether agents comply with appropriate rules
of market place behavior that provide for certain consumer and competition
safeguards. Some suggestions are as follows.
Misleading
and deceptive conduct
11. The guidelines issued by the Office of the Telecommunications
Authority for telecommunications service providers, on acceptable
advertising practices, noted below, could serve as a basis for formulating
appropriate principles that agents should follow when marketing
their services to the public.
-
Advertising should be clean, honest and truthful.
-
Comparative advertising is acceptable so long as references to
a competitor, or a competitor's products or services is fair,
reasonable and not misleading.
-
Advertisements which criticize a competitor or a competitor's
products or services should be avoided.
-
Disparaging or smearing advertising does harm to the image of
the industry.
-
Advertisements should be capable of substantiation.
-
The purpose is to prove any claims made in advertisements. While
the substantiation need not be unequivocal, it is good practice
to indicate the source of research or authority on which the claim
is based.
-
The use of superlatives should be avoided unless substantiated
by facts.
-
Technical jargon and technology comparisons should be used with
care. Inappropriate use of jargon and comparisons can be counter
productive in that it tends to confuse and mislead the consumers
rather than explain the merits of the products or services.
-
The identity of the product/service provider should be clearly
indicated in all promotional materials that consumers have no
doubt which company is providing what products and services.
-
Advertising should maintain decency and good taste.
Competition
oversight
12. In the Government's May 1998 Statement on Competition Policy
the Government noted that industry self regulation (such as codes
of practice) could be one means by which competition could be promoted,
thereby attaining the objectives of economic efficiency and free
trade.
13.
The Council suggests that the domain name registrar could establish
a general competition code of practice, against which registrars
would be assessed, requiring them to refrain from certain restrictive
practices that distort markets and impair economic efficiency or
free trade. Examples were given in the Government's policy
statement, such as price-fixing, bid-rigging, and market allocation.
A simple complaints handling procedure could be maintained by the
registrar, where any restrictive trade practices that allegedly
impair economic efficiency and fair trade, could be subject to scrutiny
and sanctioning, or otherwise, by the registrar.
Alternative
Dispute Resolution
14. The Council also agrees with the Government that an alternative
dispute resolution should be developed in Hong Kong to facilitate
early resolution of .hk domain name disputes, which can also be
used by consumers as a possible way to get redress in other e-commerce
disputes.
Consumer
Council
13 July 2000
|