<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[council] Singular and Plurals
- To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [council] Singular and Plurals
- From: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 18:42:30 -0700
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: MailAPI 24256
All,
Prompted by a spirited discussion last night at the gala about the Council's
standing to move to address the singular/plural strings not flagged by the
contention review, Marika has unearthed the Council's previous action on
confusingly similar strings in the new gTLD program.
Perhaps, in our wrap-up, we can talk a bit about whether this is a matter on
which we want to act.
Cheers,
Berard
--------- Original Message ---------Subject: Confusingly similar
From: Marika Konings <marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: 4/10/13 6:36 pm
To: "john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi John,
The only recommendation that I found related to user confusion in the new gTLD
Report that was adopted by the GNSO Council is 'Recommendation 2 Discussion --
Strings must not be confusingly similar to an existing top-level domain' (see
http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/new-gtlds/pdp-dec05-fr-parta-08aug07.htm). It
may be worth checking with some of the others involved at that time (Avri,
Jeff?) to see if they have any further specific direction on whether there are
other recommendations in relation to this issue as this was discussed long
before my time at ICANN.
With best regards,
Marika
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|