ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [council] DRAFT text of letter from Council to Board RE: singular and plural new gTLD applications

  • To: john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [council] DRAFT text of letter from Council to Board RE: singular and plural new gTLD applications
  • From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 00:02:22 -0400
  • Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=9ID2aCwKuHEhZ1xcwlqLq760mrvDucJ+78OimWcWDEY=; b=HHnz2PNf5bMFujCrYCzM87X6BKewH736D4h2yBU4/p/v0PaiF3keqjcWJ2rydjAFA4 WQI1AjA9iX3yf+9jCr8N7gzD9eMusDOlHLFkqEhWJ9zlCQW/Fg+gg1/Cxe8frvmML8G2 Z4FIKnpA0xiRwd5znNXzNd7BNEUWVYx2kJBZT00SvTh3F/WschP5Ckcj2dhBGsmZGn2d rSEiW55Otqyua9N50TzpgGYtY1kj3OI8TnR7FjgBe0jLDfO0aONSF2JKSJ4BjqLujO6q UP5OSPv+pLy3YlN+Aal9rDuXXfMt0WHBO9CWqKiQFYkYIfrkd31CggK5D0D/+aAM6J7b zHxA==
  • In-reply-to: <20130410204024.a9a203d782c20324abd21efa41e2a5a6.91ed402bab.mailapi@email14.secureserver.net>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <20130410204024.a9a203d782c20324abd21efa41e2a5a6.91ed402bab.mailapi@email14.secureserver.net>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130308 Thunderbird/17.0.4
I would not support the assertion that the evaluations contravene
policy, or "that we have heard *and share* concerns." I could support
sending a question on which we'd like further information in order to
assess whether policy has been implemented properly.

--Wendy

On 04/10/2013 11:40 PM, john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> All, Here is my take on the text of a letter from Jonathan to Steve
> on the subject of singular and plural new gTLD applications as we
> agreed ought to be written and sent. Cheers, Berard
> 
> In the course of our meetings this week in Beijing, we have heard and
> share the concerns expressed about the undesirable consequences of
> allowing both singular and plural forms of the same word to be
> delegated in the news gTLD program. On the basis of policy
> recommendations of the Council to avoid consumer confusion, this
> letter asks for clarity on why that policy was, effectively, set
> aside by the panelist that ICANN enrolled to conduct string
> similarity tests. Specifically, in the new gTLD Report that was
> adopted by the GNSO Council was “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).
> The effect of singular and plurals is already embedded in practice.
> Note that WIPO mediation rules include this: “Words used in the
> singular include the plural and vice versa, as the context may
> require.” At a minimum, the Council requests fuller disclosure about
> the process by which the panelist made their determination and why
> the Board accepted this variance from existing practice and gTLD
> policy. Greater transparency will help the Council evaluate whether
> the criteria for string similarity were properly conveyed to the
> panelist, whether the panelist followed that policy advice and how we
> can address the concerns of the community.
>
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>