Thanks Desiree. I hope the amendment is accepted. The inclusion of “Such an appropriate mechanism might include placing any confusingly similar application on hold, pending such resolution” will allow me to vote yes.

 

Best,

Paul

 

 

From: desiree-me via council <council@icann.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2025 1:05 PM
To: council@gnso icann. org <council@gnso.icann.org>
Subject: [council] friendly amendment to the Option 4 IGO/INGO

 

 

Dear Councillors

 


In conversation with some of you I have expressed some unease about the TLD applicant not seeing displayed properly warnings about the existence of the Reserved list, whilst filling in the application form. Links may not be visible enough. I 

like to propose a small friendly amendment to the Option 4 text, under a)

 

 

 

  1. The application process must prominently display and clearly communicate this List so that TLD applicants are fully aware of its existence and implications prior to filing its choice of the TLD string. 

 

b) That Org should contact the relevant protected organizations after String Confirmation Day to ensure they are aware of any applied-for strings that could be considered confusingly similar to those on the Reserved Names list, and are aware of their options for bringing formal Objection or seeking support of the GAC.

 

c) That Org should also contact the GAC after String Confirmation Day to ensure that the GAC are aware of any applied-for strings that could be considered confusingly similar to those on the Reserved Names list, in order that GAC members may consider whether any Early Warning(s) or GAC Consensus Advice would be appropriate.

 

d) We also would encourage the GAC to contact the relevant protected organizations to ensure that they are aware of the applied-for strings and can decide whether to utilize any challenge methods outlined in the AGB. e) That Org should also notify the applicant of the confusingly similar string, and give them the option to withdraw for an appropriate refund.

 

f) The GNSO Council encourages the Board to ensure that Org puts appropriate mechanisms in place to safeguard the strings on the Reserved Names List, pending the conclusion of the Objection period, the outcome of any filed Objection, the outcome of any GAC Consensus Advice against a confusingly similar string, or confirmation from the GAC that it does not intend to issue Consensus Advice.  Such an appropriate mechanism might include placing any confusingly similar application on hold, pending such resolution.  

 

 

Hope this is an acceptable friendly amendment.

 

best 

Desiree

—

NCA CPH Councillor