Cyril raises an important point here. The implications are significant. Limiting ourselves to technical confusion is simply not, in my view, practical. Can you imagine the chaos that will result if entire language communities are confused because of the similarity in the strings? On another note, the IDN Working Group reached Agreement (in the RFC 2119 way) on the principle that confusingly similar strings should be avoided. We have never questioned the process by which the IDN WG reached that conclusion and, in fact, the BGC WG singles out the IDN WG as an example of a successful WG. What does a Council decision to reject a properly-constituted, process-following WG principle on which Agreement was reached mean for the viability for the BGC WG recommendations? K -----Original Message----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org] On Behalf Of cyrilchua@atmdlaw.com.sg Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 7:21 AM To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report Hi Avri We need to maintain the consistency because we do not want similar factual disputes having different outcomes in gTLD and ccTLD. Kind regards, Cyril Chua Partner IP & Technology Group -------- Alban Tay Mahtani & de Silva LLP 39 Robinson Road #07-01, Robinson Point, Singapore 068911 Tel: (65) 6534 5266 / Fax: (65) 6223 8762 / DID: (65) 6428 9812 http://www.atmdlaw.com.sg -------- ALBAN TAY MAHTANI & DE SILVA LLP < This message (including attachments) contains privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not to take any action in reliance on it nor to disseminate, distribute, publish or copy this message. If you have received this message in error, please accept our apologies, delete all copies from your system and notify us at mail@atmdlaw.com.sg. Unless it relates to the official business of ATMD, any opinions or matters expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. > ----- Original Message ----- From: Avri Doria [avri@psg.com] Sent: 02/12/2008 05:41 PM ZE5B To: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org> Subject: Re: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report Hi, While it would be inconsistent with the new gTLD policy recommendations, I don't know if there is a necessity for consistency in this case as we are dealing with ccTLDs not gTLDs and we are dealing with significant expressions of a countries name or identity. So the conditions might be different. In terms of the statement I am not sure I know what Technical confusion is any more then I really understood what confusingly similar was. Are we saying it should not be visually or homographically similar,? I also wonder if there is another problem in this one. The name of a country in various representations will be similar to the name of the country in another representation - but in a sense that seems appropriate and not a problem. a. On 12 Feb 2008, at 16:28, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
That would be inconsistent with the recommendations made for new gTLDs. We can't go back now and change what we already did.
Chuck
From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org [mailto:owner-council@gnso.icann.org ] On Behalf Of Robin Gross Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 5:53 AM To: Avri Doria Cc: Council GNSO Subject: Re: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
How about: "Strings that cause technical confusion should be avoided."
Thanks, Robin
On Feb 12, 2008, at 1:43 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
On 12 Feb 2008, at 14:29, Robin Gross wrote:
**** THEREFORE, I propose that we amend our statement, so that only "technical confusion" is the type of confusion that we deal with. Otherwise, not only are we in contrast with legal norms, we are also outside the scope of ICANN's authority.
Can you suggest the exact wording change you are proposing?
As with other suggested changes, I believe we can make if there are no objections. On the other hand, if there are objections, we may need to vote on this amendment before voting on the response itself.
thanks
a.
IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin@ipjustice.org