Good edits.
Just a type in 1st bullet – “no result” should read “not
result”
Sincerely,
Zahid Jamil
Barrister-at-law
Jamil & Jamil
Barristers-at-law
219-221 Central Hotel Annexe
Merewether Road, Karachi. Pakistan
Cell: +923008238230
Tel: +92 21 5680760 / 5685276 / 5655025
Fax: +92 21 5655026
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.
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org
[mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of Rosette, Kristina
Sent: 11 June 2010 02:05
To: council@gnso.icann.org
Subject: [council] Language suggestions
Too
complicated to say what changed where so here's some suggested revised
language:
This request
is seen as urgent because there are conditions under which it may be
appropriate for applicants to request Extended Review for a string which has
been denied further processing based on a finding of confusing similarity in
the Initial Evaluation. This Extended Review would evaluate extenuating
circumstances in the application that may result in a finding of no detrimental
confusion notwithstanding the Initial Evaluation. This may occur, inter
alia, in cases such as:
• The same Registry
Operator (for an existing gTLD or a proposed new gTLD) could apply for a string
that, although similar to an existing or applied for string, is not
detrimentally similar from a user point of view. For example, it is possible
that an applicant could apply for both a gTLD with a conventional ASCII label
and a corresponding internationalized gTLD (IDN gTLD) that could be found
confusingly similar in the Initial Evaluation, but no result in the detrimental
user confusion that the GNSO recommendation was trying to avoid.
• A situation where
there is an agreement between a new applicant Registry Operator and the
Registry Operator of an existing gTLD that allows for better service for the
users in the geographical area where the new gTLD will be offered. For example,
MuseDoma, the Registry Operator for .museum could enter into an agreement with
a new gTLD applicant to offer an IDN version of .museum for a specific language
community. The two strings might be found confusingly similar in the Initial
Evaluation even though the delegation of both would not cause detrimental
confusion.
We thank you
for your prompt attention to this GNSO Council request.