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

[Mason Cole <mcole@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I disagree with:

- the idea that we know standards were set aside by the panel
- that singulars and plurals co-existing are necessarily bad
- that the outcomes were in error

So, sorry, I can't support this letter.

In addition, I point to the practical matter that I very much doubt staff would 
be likely to demand that an evaluation panel divulge its internal processes.  I 
similarly doubt that would be a good idea, for a lot of reasons.

Sent from my iPad

On Apr 11, 2013, at 11:49 AM, Zahid Jamil <zahid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Like the letter.  In addition would it be useful to characterise the outcome 
> an error?
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards, 
> 
> Zahid Jamil
> Barrister-at-law
> Jamil & Jamil
> Barristers-at-law
> 219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
> Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
> Cell: +923008238230
> Tel: +92 21 35680760 / 35685276 / 35655025
> Fax: +92 21 35655026
> www.jamilandjamil.com
> 
> Notice / Disclaimer
> This message contains confidential information and its contents are being 
> communicated only for the intended recipients . If you are not the intended 
> recipient you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please 
> notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message by 
> mistake and delete it from your system. The contents above may contain/are 
> the intellectual property of Jamil & Jamil, Barristers-at-Law, and constitute 
> privileged information protected by attorney client privilege. The 
> reproduction, publication, use, amendment, modification of any kind 
> whatsoever of any part or parts (including photocopying or storing it in any 
> medium by electronic means whether or not transiently or incidentally or some 
> other use of this communication) without prior written permission and consent 
> of Jamil & Jamil is prohibited.
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On 11 Apr 2013, at 11:40, 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.
>> 
>>