- ALAC-Announce - lists.icann.org

FW: ICANN News Alert -- String Similarity: IDN Variant Review Results
by ICANN At-Large Staff March 1, 2013

March 1, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-01mar13-en.htm ________________________________ String Similarity: IDN Variant Review Results 1 March 2013 In an announcement<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-26feb13-en.htm> on 26 February 2013, ICANN published a list of string similarity contention sets wherein two or more applied-for gTLD strings are identical or so nearly resemble one another visually that they are likely to cause confusion. In ICANN's New gTLD program, string similarity checks on Internationalized Domain Name (IDN) strings go beyond visual resemblance. The string similarity panel has now completed a review of potential IDN variant characters. Based on this review, two (2) contention sets of potential IDN variant strings have been identified. U-Label Unicode Code Points A-Label Application ID 盛贸饭店盛貿飯店 U+76DB, U+8D38, U+996D, U+5E97 U+76DB, U+8CBF, U+98EF, U+5E97 xn--hxt035czzpffl xn--hxt035cmppuel 1-940-43388 1-940-75591 点看點看 U+70B9, U+770B U+9EDE, U+770B xn--3pxu8k xn--c1yn36f 1-1254-85868 1-1254-86222 As per section 1.3.3 of the Applicant Guidebook "Multiple applicants apply for strings that are identified by ICANN as variants of one another. These applications will be placed in a contention set and will follow the contention resolution procedures in Module 4." For more information and the procedures used to perform the IDN variant review see the IDN Variant TLDs - Integrated Issues Report, Appendix 5 at http://www.icann.org/en/topics/idn/idn-vip-integrated-issues-final-clean-20… [PDF, 2.1 MB]. The IDN Variant TLD Program is tasked to develop solutions and define necessary processes that must be in place to enable future delegation of IDN variant TLDs. More information about this program can be found at: http://www.icann.org/en/resources/idn/variant-tlds View all String Contention Sets: PDF<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/application-results/similarity-…> [167 KB], CSV<https://icann.box.com/shared/static/y4h0wywlsbk9nlwgvqsg.csv> [67 KB] This message was sent to matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org> from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by [http://app.icontact.com/images/icontact_tryFree.gif] <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=24564788&l=6333&s=BCA3&m=90…>

1 0

FW: ICANN News Alert -- Objection Period Closing 13 March 2013
by ICANN At-Large Staff March 1, 2013

March 1, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-28feb13-en.htm ________________________________ Objection Period Closing 13 March 2013 28 February 2013 Objections to new gTLD strings must be submitted by 13 March 2013 at 23:59:59 UTC in order to be considered by Dispute Resolution Service Providers (DRSPs). The objection process is intended to afford businesses, individuals, governmental entities and communities an opportunity to formally advance arguments against introducing certain new gTLDs into the domain name system. Parties with standing may file formal objections to applied-for gTLD strings on the grounds of string confusion, legal rights, limited public interest or community opposition. Objections at a Glance * Objections must be: * filed directly with the appropriate DRSP<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/odr#file-objection> * written in English * limited to 5000 words or 20 pages, whichever is less * note: administrative portions of objection filing documents will be excluded from the word/page count * addressed to only one application, from only one objector * based upon only one of the grounds for objection listed above * Fees apply: DRSPs determine the amount Objection Funding Opportunities for Governmental Entities and ALAC ICANN will make funding available to eligible governmental entities and the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) to cover DRSP costs. Interested parties must submit a funding request form<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/odr> by 11 March 2013. Learn more about Objection & Dispute Resolution<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/odr>. This message was sent to matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org> from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by [http://app.icontact.com/images/icontact_tryFree.gif] <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=24564788&l=6333&s=BCA3&m=90…>

1 0

VOTE ANNOUNCEMENT: ALAC Statement on the "Closed Generic" gTLD Applications
by ICANN At-Large Staff March 1, 2013

March 1, 2013

Dear All, Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Chair of the ALAC, has asked that a vote be held by the ALAC on the proposed ratification of the "ALAC Statement on the "Closed Generic" gTLD Applications<https://community.icann.org/x/Z4JwAg>." ***** Question: Do you support the ratification of the "ALAC Statement on the "<https://community.icann.org/x/Z4JwAg><https://community.icann.org/x/Z4JwAg>Closed Generic" gTLD Applications<https://community.icann.org/x/Z4JwAg>" for communication to the relevant parties? ***** Additional information on this final paper can be found on the At-Large "Closed Generic" gTLD Applications Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/Z4JwAg>. Please note that the poll will be open from 01-March-2013 16:30 UTC to 06-March-2013 23:59 UTC. Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0

FW: ICANN News Alert -- Implementation of Expired Registration Recovery Policy
by ICANN At-Large Staff March 1, 2013

March 1, 2013

[http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-28feb13-en.htm ________________________________ Implementation of Expired Registration Recovery Policy 28 February 2013 ICANN is pleased to announce the implementation of the Expired Registration Recovery Policy ("ERRP")<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/consensus-policies/errp>. This policy was developed from the Generic Name Supporting Organization ("GNSO")'s Post Expiration Domain Name Recovery ("PEDNR") recommendations, which were adopted by ICANN's Board of Directors on 28 October 2011. The policy was drafted in consultation with the GNSO's PEDNR Implementation Review Team and was posted for public comment on 11 October 2012. The ERRP is expected to promote better understanding of registrants' options and help alleviate common issues related to the expiration of gTLD registrations. This policy is intended to help align registrant expectations with registrar practices by establishing certain minimum communications requirements and making renewal and redemption of domain name registrations uniformly available in prescribed circumstances. Some of the most notable provisions of the ERRP include the following i<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-28feb13-en.htm#foot1>: 1. To help prevent unintended non-renewal of domain name registrations, registrars will be required to notify registered name holders of the expiration of their registrations at least two times: approximately one month prior to the expiration date and, again, approximately one week prior to the expiration date. 2. All gTLD registries must offer a Redemption Grace Period of 30 days immediately following the deletion of a registration. (Sponsored gTLDs are exempt, and not required to offer a Redemption Grace Period.) During the Redemption Grace Period, the registrant must be permitted by its registrar to restore the deleted registration. 3. To promote consumer choice and awareness, registrars must make their renewal and redemption fees reasonably available to registered name holders and prospective registered name holders at the time of registration of a domain name. 4. As in the past, registrars may delete registrations at any time after they expire, subject to applicable consensus policies and provisions of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement<http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/ra-agreement-21may09-en.htm>. However, the ERRP requires that resolution of the domain name be interrupted for a period of time after expiration, but before deletion, of the name to help make the registrant aware of the expiration of its name. Additionally, any parking page hosted by the registrar at the expired domain name must include or point to renewal instructions. All ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registries are required to comply with the Expired Registration Recovery Policy by no later than 31 August 2013. Consistent with the recommendations of the GNSO's PEDNR Working Group, ICANN is in the process of developing educational materials in consultation with interested stakeholders to help the community better understand this policy and how it applies to them. A link to the ERRP can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/consensus-policies/errp ________________________________ i<http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-28feb13-en.htm#note1> The actual language of the ERRP is binding on ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registries, not the summary provided here. This message was sent to matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org> from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by [http://app.icontact.com/images/icontact_tryFree.gif] <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=24564788&l=6333&s=BCA3&m=90…>

1 0

Implementation of Expired Registration Recovery Policy
by At-Large Staff Feb. 28, 2013

Feb. 28, 2013

https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-28feb13-en.htm Implementation of Expired Registration Recovery Policy 28 February 2013 ICANN is pleased to announce the implementation of the Expired Registration Recovery Policy ("ERRP") <https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/consensus-policies/errp> . This policy was developed from the Generic Name Supporting Organization ("GNSO")'s Post Expiration Domain Name Recovery ("PEDNR") recommendations, which were adopted by ICANN's Board of Directors on 28 October 2011. The policy was drafted in consultation with the GNSO's PEDNR Implementation Review Team and was posted for public comment on 11 October 2012. The ERRP is expected to promote better understanding of registrants' options and help alleviate common issues related to the expiration of gTLD registrations. This policy is intended to help align registrant expectations with registrar practices by establishing certain minimum communications requirements and making renewal and redemption of domain name registrations uniformly available in prescribed circumstances. Some of the most notable provisions of the ERRP include the following i <https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-28feb13-en.htm#foo t1> : 1. To help prevent unintended non-renewal of domain name registrations, registrars will be required to notify registered name holders of the expiration of their registrations at least two times: approximately one month prior to the expiration date and, again, approximately one week prior to the expiration date. 2. All gTLD registries must offer a Redemption Grace Period of 30 days immediately following the deletion of a registration. (Sponsored gTLDs are exempt, and not required to offer a Redemption Grace Period.) During the Redemption Grace Period, the registrant must be permitted by its registrar to restore the deleted registration. 3. To promote consumer choice and awareness, registrars must make their renewal and redemption fees reasonably available to registered name holders and prospective registered name holders at the time of registration of a domain name. 4. As in the past, registrars may delete registrations at any time after they expire, subject to applicable consensus policies and provisions of the Registrar Accreditation Agreement <https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/raa/ra-agreement-21may09-en.h tm> . However, the ERRP requires that resolution of the domain name be interrupted for a period of time after expiration, but before deletion, of the name to help make the registrant aware of the expiration of its name. Additionally, any parking page hosted by the registrar at the expired domain name must include or point to renewal instructions. All ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registries are required to comply with the Expired Registration Recovery Policy by no later than 31 August 2013. Consistent with the recommendations of the GNSO's PEDNR Working Group, ICANN is in the process of developing educational materials in consultation with interested stakeholders to help the community better understand this policy and how it applies to them. A link to the ERRP can be found here: http://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/consensus-policies/errp <https://www.icann.org/en/resources/registrars/consensus-policies/errp> i <https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-28feb13-en.htm#not e1> The actual language of the ERRP is binding on ICANN-accredited registrars and gTLD registries, not the summary provided here. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org One World, One Internet

1 0

New gTLD Program: String Similarity Contention Sets
by At-Large Staff Feb. 28, 2013

Feb. 28, 2013

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-26feb13-en.htm New gTLD Program: String Similarity Contention Sets 26 February 2013 ICANN is publishing today the contention sets identified by the string similarity review for applications submitted as part of the New gTLD Program. Review the full list of contention sets here: PDF <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/application-results/similarity- contention-26feb13-en.pdf> [162 KB], CSV <https://icann.box.com/shared/static/zhomj6atxakcv80iope5.csv> [65 KB] or from the Applicants' Corner <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/corner> page on the new gTLD microsite. Overall statistics about Contention Sets * 2 Non-Exact Match Contention Sets > * .hotels & .hoteis > * .unicorn & .unicom * 230 Exact Match Contention Sets * 754 Total Applications in contention The Current Application Status <http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus> page on the new gTLD microsite will be updated to reflect these contention sets. The role of the String Similarity Panel is to assess whether a proposed gTLD string creates a probability of user confusion due to similarity with any reserved name, any existing TLD, any requested IDN ccTLD, or any new gTLD string applied for in the current application round. Per the Applicant Guidebook, a contention set is a group of two or more applications containing identical or visually similar applied-for gTLD strings. For more information on string contention procedures, please refer to Module 4 <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/string-contention-procedures-04 jun12-en.pdf> [PDF, 428 KB] of the Applicant Guidebook. As a reminder, the objection filing period is open until 13 March 2013. For more information refer to the Objection & Dispute Resolution <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/odr> page. Glen de Saint Géry GNSO Secretariat gnso.secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org http://gnso.icann.org

1 0

FW: ICANN News Alert -- New gTLD Program: String Similarity Contention Sets
by ICANN At-Large Staff Feb. 27, 2013

Feb. 27, 2013

From: ICANN News Alert <communications(a)icann.org<mailto:communications@icann.org>> Date: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 8:27 AM To: Matt Ashtiani <matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org>> Subject: ICANN News Alert -- New gTLD Program: String Similarity Contention Sets [http://www.icann.org/images/gradlogo_bow.jpg]<http://www.icann.org/> News Alert http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-26feb13-en.htm ________________________________ New gTLD Program: String Similarity Contention Sets 26 February 2013 ICANN is publishing today the contention sets identified by the string similarity review for applications submitted as part of the New gTLD Program. Review the full list of contention sets here: PDF<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/application-results/similarity-…> [162 KB], CSV<https://icann.box.com/shared/static/zhomj6atxakcv80iope5.csv> [65 KB] or from the Applicants' Corner<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/corner> page on the new gTLD microsite. Overall statistics about Contention Sets * 2 Non-Exact Match Contention Sets * .hotels & .hoteis * .unicorn & .unicom * 230 Exact Match Contention Sets * 754 Total Applications in contention The Current Application Status<http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus> page on the new gTLD microsite will be updated to reflect these contention sets. The role of the String Similarity Panel is to assess whether a proposed gTLD string creates a probability of user confusion due to similarity with any reserved name, any existing TLD, any requested IDN ccTLD, or any new gTLD string applied for in the current application round. Per the Applicant Guidebook, a contention set is a group of two or more applications containing identical or visually similar applied-for gTLD strings. For more information on string contention procedures, please refer to Module 4<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/string-contention-procedures-04…> [PDF, 428 KB] of the Applicant Guidebook. As a reminder, the objection filing period is open until 13 March 2013. For more information refer to the Objection & Dispute Resolution<http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/odr> page. This message was sent to matt.ashtiani(a)icann.org<mailto:matt.ashtiani@icann.org> from: ICANN | 12025 Waterfront Drive Suite 300 | Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email Marketing by [http://app.icontact.com/images/icontact_tryFree.gif] <http://www.icontact.com/a.pl/144186> Manage Your Subscription <http://app.icontact.com/icp/mmail-mprofile.pl?r=24564788&l=6333&s=BCA3&m=90…>

1 0

New gTLD Program: String Similarity Contention Sets | ICANN
by At-Large Staff Feb. 27, 2013

Feb. 27, 2013

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-26feb13-en.htm New gTLD Program: String Similarity Contention Sets 26 February 2013 ICANN is publishing today the contention sets identified by the string similarity review for applications submitted as part of the New gTLD Program. Review the full list of contention sets here: PDF <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/application-results/similarity- contention-26feb13-en.pdf> [162 KB], CSV <https://icann.box.com/shared/static/zhomj6atxakcv80iope5.csv> [65 KB] or from the Applicants' Corner <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/corner> page on the new gTLD microsite. Overall statistics about Contention Sets * 2 Non-Exact Match Contention Sets > * .hotels & .hoteis > * .unicorn & .unicom * 230 Exact Match Contention Sets * 754 Total Applications in contention The Current Application Status <http://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus> page on the new gTLD microsite will be updated to reflect these contention sets. The role of the String Similarity Panel is to assess whether a proposed gTLD string creates a probability of user confusion due to similarity with any reserved name, any existing TLD, any requested IDN ccTLD, or any new gTLD string applied for in the current application round. Per the Applicant Guidebook, a contention set is a group of two or more applications containing identical or visually similar applied-for gTLD strings. For more information on string contention procedures, please refer to Module 4 <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/applicants/agb/string-contention-procedures-04 jun12-en.pdf> [PDF, 428 KB] of the Applicant Guidebook. As a reminder, the objection filing period is open until 13 March 2013. For more information refer to the Objection & Dispute Resolution <http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/odr> page. -- Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org One World, One Internet

1 0

CALL FOR COMMENTS: At-Large Expired Registration Recovery Education Needs Workspace
by ICANN At-Large Staff Feb. 27, 2013

Feb. 27, 2013

Dear All, Please note that the At-Large Expired Registration Recovery Education Needs Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/34twAg> has been created. Please note that this workspace will be used to collected the At-Large's Expired Registration Recovery Education Needs. Please submit any comments on the workspace using the comments function by 15-March-2013 at 23:59 UTC. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0

VOTE RESULTS: ALAC Correspondence on the Report of the GNSO WG on Consumer Trust, Consumer Choice, and Competition
by ICANN At-Large Staff Feb. 26, 2013

Feb. 26, 2013

Dear All, With 15 out of 15 ALAC Members having voted on the "ALAC Correspondence on the Report of the GNSO WG on Consumer Trust, Consumer Choice, and Competition<https://community.icann.org/x/0oFZAg>" we can confirm that the result is quorate. ***** Question: Do you support the ratification of the "ALAC Correspondence on the Report of the GNSO WG on Consumer Trust, Consumer Choice, and Competition<https://community.icann.org/x/0oFZAg>" for communication to the relevant parties? ALAC Correspondence on the Report of the GNSO WG on Consumer Trust, Consumer Choice, and Competition Number of voters: 15 · Group size: 15 · Percentage voted: 100.00 Ranked by votes Rank Options Votes % Voters 1 Yes 14 93.33 Holly Raiche, Carlton Samuels, Eduardo Diaz, Tijani Ben Jemaa, Natalia Enciso, Dev Anand Teelucksingh, Jean-Jacques Subrenat, Sandra Hoferichter, Evan Leibovitch, Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Yaovi Atohoun, Rinalia Abdul Rahim, Titi Akinsanmi, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro 2 Abstain 1 6.67 Alan Greenberg 3 No 0 0.00 ***** We can confirm that the following members did not participate in this vote: n/a We can confirm that the following members abstained in this vote. For those that have abstained, would you like to provide an explanation of why you abstained? Alan Greenberg You may review the results independently under: https://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=28919biBuyf7wLMN8wyCcMhh All closed ALAC votes may be reviewed under: https://www.bigpulse.com/m7097 Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0