Message From Paul & Proposed Agenda | SubPro Small Team Plus | Monday, 1 July 2024
Sent on behalf of Paul: Hi everyone, I think we had a good call last week, but we are starting to get bogged down in implementation details, e.g. what would be the criteria for a panel to apply. The Strawman below is meant to get us focused back on the Policy. We can include our various implementation guidance ideas as well and since they will not be policy, we don't have to agree with them at this stage to pass them along to the Council. Best, Paul Strawman: * Any member of the global community can identify applications which are singular and plurals of each other in the same language. The reporter must provide the applications, the language, and the dictionary used to identify the reported applications. * Staff will review the report to ensure that the three reporting elements are found in the report and validate that the application strings are in fact, singulars/plurals of each other. If they are, then staff will put the applications into a singular/plural contention set. * ICANN should form a singular/plurals panel before which applicants in singular/plural contention sets can submit arguments as to why the two or more application strings will not result in consumer confusion. The panel will decide whether or not to keep the applications in the singular/plural contention set or release them from such contention. The IRT should develop criteria for the panel to consider. The panel's decision will be final and not appealable. Please see the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Monday, 1 July at 1400 UTC: 1. Welcome & SOIs 2. Review of Strawman 3. AOB Steven Chan VP, Policy Development Support & GNSO Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email: steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> Skype: steve.chan55 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=o7Auz997kA-HPv9PHJCjFVZw7Pgo8krw4MxfqCwBrIU&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=>
Thanks Steve and Paul, This looks good to me. I'm just wondering what happens when singular and plural are presented and no one notifies ICANN of a conflict. Will the singular and plural go into a String Similarity Review process anyway? Wasn't this an outside panel determination in the 2012 round? Was it determined at ICC? Are we recommending (A) an internal ICANN panel for singulars and plurals - but only when a party notifies ICANN of the conflict and (b) if no notification of a conflict to ICANN, the String Similarity set may or may not end up at ICC? My recollection is that 2013 String Similarity Review processes for the 2012 round were quite detailed but there may be new guidelines in the draft AGB for the next round. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 2:00 PM Steve Chan via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST < gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> wrote:
Sent on behalf of Paul:
Hi everyone,
I think we had a good call last week, but we are starting to get bogged down in implementation details, e.g. what would be the criteria for a panel to apply. The Strawman below is meant to get us focused back on the Policy. We can include our various implementation guidance ideas as well and since they will not be policy, we don't have to agree with them at this stage to pass them along to the Council.
Best,
Paul
Strawman:
- Any member of the global community can identify applications which are singular and plurals of each other in the same language. The reporter must provide the applications, the language, and the dictionary used to identify the reported applications. - Staff will review the report to ensure that the three reporting elements are found in the report and validate that the application strings are in fact, singulars/plurals of each other. If they are, then staff will put the applications into a singular/plural contention set. - ICANN should form a singular/plurals panel before which applicants in singular/plural contention sets can submit arguments as to why the two or more application strings will not result in consumer confusion. The panel will decide whether or not to keep the applications in the singular/plural contention set or release them from such contention. The IRT should develop criteria for the panel to consider. The panel's decision will be final and not appealable.
Please see the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Monday, 1 July at 1400 UTC:
1. Welcome & SOIs 2. Review of Strawman 3. AOB
*Steven Chan*
VP, Policy Development Support & GNSO Relations
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
Email: steve.chan@icann.org
Skype: steve.chan55
Mobile: +1.310.339.4410
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=o7Auz997kA-HPv9PHJCjFVZw7Pgo8krw4MxfqCwBrIU&e=>
Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=>
Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> _______________________________________________ GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST mailing list -- gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Anne, We have a funny acronym problem here. In 2012, the String Similarity Panel was indeed ICC, but not the ICC most people think of. It was not the International Chamber of Commerce, but rather a company called InterConnect Communications (BTW, another case against IGO acronym protection...but i digress). String Confusion objections were heard by the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (which I believe is a division of the American Arbitration Association). So with that interesting confusion out of the way, I do not believe that ICANN has even sought expressions of interest for who will serve as the string similarity review evaluators (but I may not be up to date). So, whether it is the InterConnect Communications or not is TBD. To answer the direct question, it would appear that if no one files a notification, the string similarity panel would likely not find confusing similarity and therefore it would be up to an objector to object on string confusion grounds. This assumes (a) that the objection filing period is open at the time the string similarity results are out, and (b) the objector has standing to even raise the issue. Also keep in mind that the rules for the string similarity review has already been out for public comment (https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/strategic-initiatives/public-comment-summ...) and that period has been long closed. The comment report can be found at https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/strategic-initiatives/public-comment-summ.... The latest Guidelines are at: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/internationalized-domain-names-idn/string... Most of it covers variants (which is the most complicated issue). Singulars and Plurals were out of scope for the guidelines (See Annex A Pg. 52). [cid:e875d64f-953b-4a35-a654-d279f068d8f8] ________________________________ From: Anne ICANN via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2024 2:32 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org> Cc: gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> Subject: [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] Re: Message From Paul & Proposed Agenda | SubPro Small Team Plus | Monday, 1 July 2024 Thanks Steve and Paul, This looks good to me. I'm just wondering what happens when singular and plural are presented and no one notifies ICANN of a conflict. Will the singular and plural go into a String Similarity Review process anyway? Wasn't this an outside panel determination in the 2012 round? Was it determined at ICC? Are we recommending (A) an internal ICANN panel for singulars and plurals - but only when a party notifies ICANN of the conflict and (b) if no notification of a conflict to ICANN, the String Similarity set may or may not end up at ICC? My recollection is that 2013 String Similarity Review processes for the 2012 round were quite detailed but there may be new guidelines in the draft AGB for the next round. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 2:00 PM Steve Chan via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org>> wrote: Sent on behalf of Paul: Hi everyone, I think we had a good call last week, but we are starting to get bogged down in implementation details, e.g. what would be the criteria for a panel to apply. The Strawman below is meant to get us focused back on the Policy. We can include our various implementation guidance ideas as well and since they will not be policy, we don't have to agree with them at this stage to pass them along to the Council. Best, Paul Strawman: * Any member of the global community can identify applications which are singular and plurals of each other in the same language. The reporter must provide the applications, the language, and the dictionary used to identify the reported applications. * Staff will review the report to ensure that the three reporting elements are found in the report and validate that the application strings are in fact, singulars/plurals of each other. If they are, then staff will put the applications into a singular/plural contention set. * ICANN should form a singular/plurals panel before which applicants in singular/plural contention sets can submit arguments as to why the two or more application strings will not result in consumer confusion. The panel will decide whether or not to keep the applications in the singular/plural contention set or release them from such contention. The IRT should develop criteria for the panel to consider. The panel's decision will be final and not appealable. Please see the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Monday, 1 July at 1400 UTC: 1. Welcome & SOIs 2. Review of Strawman 3. AOB Steven Chan VP, Policy Development Support & GNSO Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email: steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> Skype: steve.chan55 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=o7Auz997kA-HPv9PHJCjFVZw7Pgo8krw4MxfqCwBrIU&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> _______________________________________________ GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST mailing list -- gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-leave@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Hi Anne, Jeff believes that if no objection was filed that the string similarity panel would not find confusion based on that. I don’t think what we are proposing would necessarily have that effect. What we are talking about is a means to ensure that two or more strings end up in contention rather than creating a process to keep them out of contention through other mechanisms. Best, Paul From: Jeff Neuman via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2024 8:16 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>; Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org Subject: [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] Re: Message From Paul & Proposed Agenda | SubPro Small Team Plus | Monday, 1 July 2024 Anne, We have a funny acronym problem here. In 2012, the String Similarity Panel was indeed ICC, but not the ICC most people think of. It was not the International Chamber of Commerce, but rather a company called InterConnect Communications (BTW, another case against IGO acronym protection...but i digress). String Confusion objections were heard by the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (which I believe is a division of the American Arbitration Association). So with that interesting confusion out of the way, I do not believe that ICANN has even sought expressions of interest for who will serve as the string similarity review evaluators (but I may not be up to date). So, whether it is the InterConnect Communications or not is TBD. To answer the direct question, it would appear that if no one files a notification, the string similarity panel would likely not find confusing similarity and therefore it would be up to an objector to object on string confusion grounds. This assumes (a) that the objection filing period is open at the time the string similarity results are out, and (b) the objector has standing to even raise the issue. Also keep in mind that the rules for the string similarity review has already been out for public comment (https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/strategic-initiatives/public-comment-summ...) and that period has been long closed. The comment report can be found at https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/strategic-initiatives/public-comment-summ.... The latest Guidelines are at: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/internationalized-domain-names-idn/string... Most of it covers variants (which is the most complicated issue). Singulars and Plurals were out of scope for the guidelines (See Annex A Pg. 52). [cid:image001.png@01DACAD5.8714C0E0] ________________________________ From: Anne ICANN via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org>> Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2024 2:32 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> Cc: gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org>> Subject: [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] Re: Message From Paul & Proposed Agenda | SubPro Small Team Plus | Monday, 1 July 2024 Thanks Steve and Paul, This looks good to me. I'm just wondering what happens when singular and plural are presented and no one notifies ICANN of a conflict. Will the singular and plural go into a String Similarity Review process anyway? Wasn't this an outside panel determination in the 2012 round? Was it determined at ICC? Are we recommending (A) an internal ICANN panel for singulars and plurals - but only when a party notifies ICANN of the conflict and (b) if no notification of a conflict to ICANN, the String Similarity set may or may not end up at ICC? My recollection is that 2013 String Similarity Review processes for the 2012 round were quite detailed but there may be new guidelines in the draft AGB for the next round. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 2:00 PM Steve Chan via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org>> wrote: Sent on behalf of Paul: Hi everyone, I think we had a good call last week, but we are starting to get bogged down in implementation details, e.g. what would be the criteria for a panel to apply. The Strawman below is meant to get us focused back on the Policy. We can include our various implementation guidance ideas as well and since they will not be policy, we don't have to agree with them at this stage to pass them along to the Council. Best, Paul Strawman: * Any member of the global community can identify applications which are singular and plurals of each other in the same language. The reporter must provide the applications, the language, and the dictionary used to identify the reported applications. * Staff will review the report to ensure that the three reporting elements are found in the report and validate that the application strings are in fact, singulars/plurals of each other. If they are, then staff will put the applications into a singular/plural contention set. * ICANN should form a singular/plurals panel before which applicants in singular/plural contention sets can submit arguments as to why the two or more application strings will not result in consumer confusion. The panel will decide whether or not to keep the applications in the singular/plural contention set or release them from such contention. The IRT should develop criteria for the panel to consider. The panel's decision will be final and not appealable. Please see the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Monday, 1 July at 1400 UTC: 1. Welcome & SOIs 2. Review of Strawman 3. AOB Steven Chan VP, Policy Development Support & GNSO Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email: steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> Skype: steve.chan55 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=o7Auz997kA-HPv9PHJCjFVZw7Pgo8krw4MxfqCwBrIU&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> _______________________________________________ GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST mailing list -- gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-leave@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. This email originated from outside the firm. Please use caution.
Thanks Jeff, for this detailed explanation. So are you saying that unless there is a notification to ICANN Org in relation to the singulars/plurals issue (if we get to such an adopted policy), there will be no String Similarity review of that singular/plural set of applications? Is that your conclusion in relation to the "out of scope" language shown below from the new String Similarity Review guidelines? *"A.5 Non-goal: Plurals and Similar Spelling Variations* In certain European languages, plural terms can be formed by very simple spelling changes, such as adding the letter ‘s’. Depending on the language, this can be the dominant pattern, or it can be one of several patterns. This makes the two labels containing singular and plural spelling of the same word, potentially both visually and semantically confusable. The confusion might be less acute whenever the spellings for singular and plural deviate more. However, it is not rare for two unrelated words having the same spelling, and for either spelling to match a different form of a different word altogether (for example, many English verbs have a form that also adds an ‘s’ and many nouns and verbs share spellings). Finally, the connection between singular and plural spelling is limited to a given language; there are cases where a plural might match the spelling of an unrelated word in a different language, or where languages share a common word, but have different plurals. EXAMPLE: 'canals' (English) vs. 'canaux' (French) EXAMPLE: 'bureaus' (English) vs. 'bureaux' (French) *Such issues make the problem at once not-so-tractable as well as not that different from cases like “color” vs. “colour” which are related to regional spelling differences of the same word.These and similar considerations have been ruled out of scope of String Similarity Review for the time being.* They are mentioned here only to note them explicitly as a non-goal. Because of the nature of the European writing systems, including the fact that two of them (Latin and Cyrillic) are shared by very large numbers of distinct languages and regional writing systems, t his particular set of issues would apply most notably to the scripts covered here and is therefore discussed in this annex." Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 6:15 PM Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com> wrote:
Anne,
We have a funny acronym problem here.
In 2012, the String Similarity Panel was indeed ICC, but not the ICC most people think of. It was not the International Chamber of Commerce, but rather a company called InterConnect Communications (BTW, another case against IGO acronym protection...but i digress).
String Confusion objections were heard by the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (which I believe is a division of the American Arbitration Association).
So with that interesting confusion out of the way, I do not believe that ICANN has even sought expressions of interest for who will serve as the string similarity review evaluators (but I may not be up to date). So, whether it is the InterConnect Communications or not is TBD.
To answer the direct question, it would appear that if no one files a notification, the string similarity panel would likely not find confusing similarity and therefore it would be up to an objector to object on string confusion grounds. This assumes (a) that the objection filing period is open at the time the string similarity results are out, and (b) the objector has standing to even raise the issue.
Also keep in mind that the rules for the string similarity review has already been out for public comment ( https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/strategic-initiatives/public-comment-summ...) and that period has been long closed. The comment report can be found at https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/strategic-initiatives/public-comment-summ... .
The latest Guidelines are at: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/internationalized-domain-names-idn/string... Most of it covers variants (which is the most complicated issue). Singulars and Plurals were out of scope for the guidelines (See Annex A Pg. 52).
------------------------------ *From:* Anne ICANN via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST < gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> *Sent:* Saturday, June 29, 2024 2:32 PM *To:* Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org> *Cc:* gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org < gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> *Subject:* [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] Re: Message From Paul & Proposed Agenda | SubPro Small Team Plus | Monday, 1 July 2024
Thanks Steve and Paul, This looks good to me. I'm just wondering what happens when singular and plural are presented and no one notifies ICANN of a conflict. Will the singular and plural go into a String Similarity Review process anyway? Wasn't this an outside panel determination in the 2012 round? Was it determined at ICC?
Are we recommending (A) an internal ICANN panel for singulars and plurals - but only when a party notifies ICANN of the conflict and (b) if no notification of a conflict to ICANN, the String Similarity set may or may not end up at ICC?
My recollection is that 2013 String Similarity Review processes for the 2012 round were quite detailed but there may be new guidelines in the draft AGB for the next round.
Anne
Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com
On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 2:00 PM Steve Chan via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST < gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> wrote:
Sent on behalf of Paul:
Hi everyone,
I think we had a good call last week, but we are starting to get bogged down in implementation details, e.g. what would be the criteria for a panel to apply. The Strawman below is meant to get us focused back on the Policy. We can include our various implementation guidance ideas as well and since they will not be policy, we don't have to agree with them at this stage to pass them along to the Council.
Best,
Paul
Strawman:
- Any member of the global community can identify applications which are singular and plurals of each other in the same language. The reporter must provide the applications, the language, and the dictionary used to identify the reported applications. - Staff will review the report to ensure that the three reporting elements are found in the report and validate that the application strings are in fact, singulars/plurals of each other. If they are, then staff will put the applications into a singular/plural contention set. - ICANN should form a singular/plurals panel before which applicants in singular/plural contention sets can submit arguments as to why the two or more application strings will not result in consumer confusion. The panel will decide whether or not to keep the applications in the singular/plural contention set or release them from such contention. The IRT should develop criteria for the panel to consider. The panel's decision will be final and not appealable.
Please see the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Monday, 1 July at 1400 UTC:
1. Welcome & SOIs 2. Review of Strawman 3. AOB
*Steven Chan*
VP, Policy Development Support & GNSO Relations
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
Email: steve.chan@icann.org
Skype: steve.chan55
Mobile: +1.310.339.4410
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=o7Auz997kA-HPv9PHJCjFVZw7Pgo8krw4MxfqCwBrIU&e=>
Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=>
Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> _______________________________________________ GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST mailing list -- gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Responses below in Red. [cid:68d25123-15a6-4658-b548-299f16e643d4] ________________________________ From: Anne ICANN <anneicanngnso@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2024 10:29 AM To: Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com> Cc: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org>; gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> Subject: Re: [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] Re: Message From Paul & Proposed Agenda | SubPro Small Team Plus | Monday, 1 July 2024 Thanks Jeff, for this detailed explanation. So are you saying that unless there is a notification to ICANN Org in relation to the singulars/plurals issue (if we get to such an adopted policy), there will be no String Similarity review of that singular/plural set of applications? Is that your conclusion in relation to the "out of scope" language shown below from the new String Similarity Review guidelines? [Jeff] - Out of Scope in the existing document just means that ICANN Org did not address the issue because it had not been approved by the ICANN Board. If it gets approved by the Board, then it may be in scope. But under the current Strawman from ICANN Org, if there is no notification to ICANN Org about a string, then the String Similarity Panel will not be looking at the singular/plural issue. "A.5 Non-goal: Plurals and Similar Spelling Variations In certain European languages, plural terms can be formed by very simple spelling changes, such as adding the letter ‘s’. Depending on the language, this can be the dominant pattern, or it can be one of several patterns. This makes the two labels containing singular and plural spelling of the same word, potentially both visually and semantically confusable. The confusion might be less acute whenever the spellings for singular and plural deviate more. However, it is not rare for two unrelated words having the same spelling, and for either spelling to match a different form of a different word altogether (for example, many English verbs have a form that also adds an ‘s’ and many nouns and verbs share spellings). Finally, the connection between singular and plural spelling is limited to a given language; there are cases where a plural might match the spelling of an unrelated word in a different language, or where languages share a common word, but have different plurals. EXAMPLE: 'canals' (English) vs. 'canaux' (French) EXAMPLE: 'bureaus' (English) vs. 'bureaux' (French) Such issues make the problem at once not-so-tractable as well as not that different from cases like “color” vs. “colour” which are related to regional spelling differences of the same word. These and similar considerations have been ruled out of scope of String Similarity Review for the time being. They are mentioned here only to note them explicitly as a non-goal. Because of the nature of the European writing systems, including the fact that two of them (Latin and Cyrillic) are shared by very large numbers of distinct languages and regional writing systems, t his particular set of issues would apply most notably to the scripts covered here and is therefore discussed in this annex." Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 6:15 PM Jeff Neuman <jeff@jjnsolutions.com<mailto:jeff@jjnsolutions.com>> wrote: Anne, We have a funny acronym problem here. In 2012, the String Similarity Panel was indeed ICC, but not the ICC most people think of. It was not the International Chamber of Commerce, but rather a company called InterConnect Communications (BTW, another case against IGO acronym protection...but i digress). String Confusion objections were heard by the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (which I believe is a division of the American Arbitration Association). So with that interesting confusion out of the way, I do not believe that ICANN has even sought expressions of interest for who will serve as the string similarity review evaluators (but I may not be up to date). So, whether it is the InterConnect Communications or not is TBD. To answer the direct question, it would appear that if no one files a notification, the string similarity panel would likely not find confusing similarity and therefore it would be up to an objector to object on string confusion grounds. This assumes (a) that the objection filing period is open at the time the string similarity results are out, and (b) the objector has standing to even raise the issue. Also keep in mind that the rules for the string similarity review has already been out for public comment (https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/strategic-initiatives/public-comment-summ...) and that period has been long closed. The comment report can be found at https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/strategic-initiatives/public-comment-summ.... The latest Guidelines are at: https://itp.cdn.icann.org/en/files/internationalized-domain-names-idn/string... Most of it covers variants (which is the most complicated issue). Singulars and Plurals were out of scope for the guidelines (See Annex A Pg. 52). [cid:ii_19073d28a1b7464c3f91] ________________________________ From: Anne ICANN via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org>> Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2024 2:32 PM To: Steve Chan <steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org>> Cc: gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org>> Subject: [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] Re: Message From Paul & Proposed Agenda | SubPro Small Team Plus | Monday, 1 July 2024 Thanks Steve and Paul, This looks good to me. I'm just wondering what happens when singular and plural are presented and no one notifies ICANN of a conflict. Will the singular and plural go into a String Similarity Review process anyway? Wasn't this an outside panel determination in the 2012 round? Was it determined at ICC? Are we recommending (A) an internal ICANN panel for singulars and plurals - but only when a party notifies ICANN of the conflict and (b) if no notification of a conflict to ICANN, the String Similarity set may or may not end up at ICC? My recollection is that 2013 String Similarity Review processes for the 2012 round were quite detailed but there may be new guidelines in the draft AGB for the next round. Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com<mailto:anneicanngnso@gmail.com> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 2:00 PM Steve Chan via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org>> wrote: Sent on behalf of Paul: Hi everyone, I think we had a good call last week, but we are starting to get bogged down in implementation details, e.g. what would be the criteria for a panel to apply. The Strawman below is meant to get us focused back on the Policy. We can include our various implementation guidance ideas as well and since they will not be policy, we don't have to agree with them at this stage to pass them along to the Council. Best, Paul Strawman: * Any member of the global community can identify applications which are singular and plurals of each other in the same language. The reporter must provide the applications, the language, and the dictionary used to identify the reported applications. * Staff will review the report to ensure that the three reporting elements are found in the report and validate that the application strings are in fact, singulars/plurals of each other. If they are, then staff will put the applications into a singular/plural contention set. * ICANN should form a singular/plurals panel before which applicants in singular/plural contention sets can submit arguments as to why the two or more application strings will not result in consumer confusion. The panel will decide whether or not to keep the applications in the singular/plural contention set or release them from such contention. The IRT should develop criteria for the panel to consider. The panel's decision will be final and not appealable. Please see the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Monday, 1 July at 1400 UTC: 1. Welcome & SOIs 2. Review of Strawman 3. AOB Steven Chan VP, Policy Development Support & GNSO Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email: steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> Skype: steve.chan55 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=o7Auz997kA-HPv9PHJCjFVZw7Pgo8krw4MxfqCwBrIU&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> _______________________________________________ GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST mailing list -- gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-leave@icann.org<mailto:gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-leave@icann.org> _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Thanks to Paul for taking us back to key principles. I have the following comments on the strawman: * Any member of the global community can identify applications which are singular and plurals of each other in the same language. The reporter must provide the applications, the language, and the dictionary used to identify the reported applications. * This should be “anyone” rather than “any member of the global community”. The latter is ambiguous. Does it mean the identifier must be a member of an SO/AC/SG/C? I don’t believe that is the intention, nor should it be. * The original staff strawperson included: “ICANN should suggest to the IRT a list of dictionaries for the UN-6 language and, with assistance from the IRT, finalize this list and include it into the AGB. The fact that a particular language or its dictionary is not listed in the AGB must not preclude end-users, applicants, or other community members from identifying singular and plural forms of the same word in the same language”. I don’t believe anyone has objected to this specific aspect of the staff strawperson, and it does not seem unhelpful to retain it. * Where there are multiple applications for the same string, then the identification of one of these will serve to identify them all. In other words if one application for SPRING and one application for SPRINGS are identified, but in fact there are two further competing applications for SPRINGS then all three of the applications for SPRINGS will be treated as having been identified. This is necessary in order to deliver the consistency of treatment that was at the heard of the SubPro recommendations. * Staff will review the report to ensure that the three reporting elements are found in the report and validate that the application strings are in fact, singulars/plurals of each other. If they are, then staff will put the applications into a singular/plural contention set. * Where one or more applications are identified as the singular/plural of an existing TLD then there will be a presumption that the new applications are rejected. * ICANN should form a singular/plurals panel before which applicants in singular/plural contention sets can submit arguments as to why the two or more application strings will not result in consumer confusion. The panel will decide whether or not to keep the applications in the singular/plural contention set or release them from such contention. The IRT should develop criteria for the panel to consider. The panel's decision will be final and not appealable. * This avenue should also apply to presumptively rejected TLDs, since we are seeking to keep as close to the intent of the original SubPro recommendations as possible. * Unless we are going to give some guidance for this assessment of consumer confusion we really are just kicking this problem to the IRT. At a minimum I believe we ought to make it clear that: * One manner in which two applicants may demonstrate that there will not be consumer confusion would be by establishing clear delineation as to eligible registrants, based on specific, objective eligibility criteria such as the possession of a licence or professional qualification. * Applicants will be expected to commit to binding contractual RVCs that will serve to safeguard against such consumer confusion, noting that the iCANN Board has stated that “ICANN should exclude from the Next Round RAs any RVCs and other comparable registry commitments that restrict content in gTLDs”. Simply stating in the application that the “intent of the TLD is X” will not be sufficient. Susan Payne Head of Legal Policy Com Laude T +44 (0) 20 7421 8250 Ext 255 [cid:image001.png@01DACBAD.21419DA0] <https://comlaude.com/> Follow us on LinkedIn<https://t-uk.xink.io/Tracking/Index/pRkAAGVfAADw_RQA0> and YouTube<https://t-uk.xink.io/Tracking/Index/bhkAAGVfAADw_RQA0> From: Steve Chan via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST <gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 10:00 PM To: gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org Subject: [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] Message From Paul & Proposed Agenda | SubPro Small Team Plus | Monday, 1 July 2024 Sent on behalf of Paul: Hi everyone, I think we had a good call last week, but we are starting to get bogged down in implementation details, e.g. what would be the criteria for a panel to apply. The Strawman below is meant to get us focused back on the Policy. We can include our various implementation guidance ideas as well and since they will not be policy, we don't have to agree with them at this stage to pass them along to the Council. Best, Paul Strawman: * Any member of the global community can identify applications which are singular and plurals of each other in the same language. The reporter must provide the applications, the language, and the dictionary used to identify the reported applications. * Staff will review the report to ensure that the three reporting elements are found in the report and validate that the application strings are in fact, singulars/plurals of each other. If they are, then staff will put the applications into a singular/plural contention set. * ICANN should form a singular/plurals panel before which applicants in singular/plural contention sets can submit arguments as to why the two or more application strings will not result in consumer confusion. The panel will decide whether or not to keep the applications in the singular/plural contention set or release them from such contention. The IRT should develop criteria for the panel to consider. The panel's decision will be final and not appealable. Please see the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Monday, 1 July at 1400 UTC: 1. Welcome & SOIs 2. Review of Strawman 3. AOB Steven Chan VP, Policy Development Support & GNSO Relations Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536 Email: steve.chan@icann.org<mailto:steve.chan@icann.org> Skype: steve.chan55 Mobile: +1.310.339.4410 Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=o7Auz997kA-HPv9PHJCjFVZw7Pgo8krw4MxfqCwBrIU&e=> Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=> Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> ________________________________ The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that Com Laude Group Limited (the “Com Laude Group”) does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group is a limited company registered in England and Wales with company number 10689074 and registered office at 30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 6181291 and registered office at 30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176 and registered office at 15 William Street, South West Lane, Edinburgh, EH3 7LL Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, a corporation incorporated in the State of Washington and principal office address at Suite 332, Securities Building, 1904 Third Ave, Seattle, WA 98101; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan with company number 0100-01-190853 and registered office at 1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan; Com Laude Domain ESP S.L.U., a company registered in Spain and registered office address at Calle Barcas 2, 2, Valencia, 46002, Spain. For further information see www.comlaude.com<https://comlaude.com/>
Thanks Susan - I think it would be great if you could walk us through these suggestions at the top of today's meeting! Anne Anne Aikman-Scalese GNSO Councilor NomCom Non-Voting 2022-2024 anneicanngnso@gmail.com On Mon, Jul 1, 2024 at 4:34 AM Susan Payne via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST < gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> wrote:
Thanks to Paul for taking us back to key principles. I have the following comments on the strawman:
- Any member of the global community can identify applications which are singular and plurals of each other in the same language. The reporter must provide the applications, the language, and the dictionary used to identify the reported applications. - This should be “anyone” rather than “any member of the global community”. The latter is ambiguous. Does it mean the identifier must be a member of an SO/AC/SG/C? I don’t believe that is the intention, nor should it be. - The original staff strawperson included: “ICANN should suggest to the IRT a list of dictionaries for the UN-6 language and, with assistance from the IRT, finalize this list and include it into the AGB. The fact that a particular language or its dictionary is not listed in the AGB must not preclude end-users, applicants, or other community members from identifying singular and plural forms of the same word in the same language”. I don’t believe anyone has objected to this specific aspect of the staff strawperson, and it does not seem unhelpful to retain it. - Where there are multiple applications for the same string, then the identification of one of these will serve to identify them all. In other words if one application for SPRING and one application for SPRINGS are identified, but in fact there are two further competing applications for SPRINGS then all three of the applications for SPRINGS will be treated as having been identified. This is necessary in order to deliver the consistency of treatment that was at the heard of the SubPro recommendations. - Staff will review the report to ensure that the three reporting elements are found in the report and validate that the application strings are in fact, singulars/plurals of each other. If they are, then staff will put the applications into a singular/plural contention set. - Where one or more applications are identified as the singular/plural of an existing TLD then there will be a presumption that the new applications are rejected. - ICANN should form a singular/plurals panel before which applicants in singular/plural contention sets can submit arguments as to why the two or more application strings will not result in consumer confusion. The panel will decide whether or not to keep the applications in the singular/plural contention set or release them from such contention. The IRT should develop criteria for the panel to consider. The panel's decision will be final and not appealable. - This avenue should also apply to presumptively rejected TLDs, since we are seeking to keep as close to the intent of the original SubPro recommendations as possible. - Unless we are going to give some guidance for this assessment of consumer confusion we really are just kicking this problem to the IRT. At a minimum I believe we ought to make it clear that: - One manner in which two applicants may demonstrate that there will not be consumer confusion would be by establishing clear delineation as to eligible registrants, based on specific, objective eligibility criteria such as the possession of a licence or professional qualification. - Applicants will be expected to commit to binding contractual RVCs that will serve to safeguard against such consumer confusion, noting that the iCANN Board has stated that “ICANN should exclude from the Next Round RAs any RVCs and other comparable registry commitments that restrict content in gTLDs”. Simply stating in the application that the “intent of the TLD is X” will not be sufficient.
Susan Payne Head of Legal Policy Com Laude *T* +44 (0) 20 7421 8250 *Ext* 255
*Follow us on** LinkedIn <https://t-uk.xink.io/Tracking/Index/pRkAAGVfAADw_RQA0> **and** YouTube <https://t-uk.xink.io/Tracking/Index/bhkAAGVfAADw_RQA0>*
*From:* Steve Chan via GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST < gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org> *Sent:* Friday, June 28, 2024 10:00 PM *To:* gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org *Subject:* [GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST] Message From Paul & Proposed Agenda | SubPro Small Team Plus | Monday, 1 July 2024
Sent on behalf of Paul:
Hi everyone,
I think we had a good call last week, but we are starting to get bogged down in implementation details, e.g. what would be the criteria for a panel to apply. The Strawman below is meant to get us focused back on the Policy. We can include our various implementation guidance ideas as well and since they will not be policy, we don't have to agree with them at this stage to pass them along to the Council.
Best,
Paul
Strawman:
- Any member of the global community can identify applications which are singular and plurals of each other in the same language. The reporter must provide the applications, the language, and the dictionary used to identify the reported applications. - Staff will review the report to ensure that the three reporting elements are found in the report and validate that the application strings are in fact, singulars/plurals of each other. If they are, then staff will put the applications into a singular/plural contention set. - ICANN should form a singular/plurals panel before which applicants in singular/plural contention sets can submit arguments as to why the two or more application strings will not result in consumer confusion. The panel will decide whether or not to keep the applications in the singular/plural contention set or release them from such contention. The IRT should develop criteria for the panel to consider. The panel's decision will be final and not appealable.
Please see the proposed agenda for the upcoming call on Monday, 1 July at 1400 UTC:
1. Welcome & SOIs 2. Review of Strawman 3. AOB
*Steven Chan*
VP, Policy Development Support & GNSO Relations
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
Email: steve.chan@icann.org
Skype: steve.chan55
Mobile: +1.310.339.4410
Find out more about the GNSO by visiting: https://learn.icann.org/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__learn.icann.org_&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=o7Auz997kA-HPv9PHJCjFVZw7Pgo8krw4MxfqCwBrIU&e=>
Follow @GNSO on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ICANN_GNSO <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_ICANN-5FGNSO&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=kWw4fQPNjw2lVKy1UjTxS2F0BmjEAzaDFWNmsYywbmE&e=>
Transcripts and recordings of GNSO Working Group and Council events are located on the GNSO Master Calendar <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_group-2Dactivities_calendar&d=DwMGaQ&c=FmY1u3PJp6wrcrwll3mSVzgfkbPSS6sJms7xcl4I5cM&r=DRa2dXAvSFpCIgmkXhFzL7ar9Qfqa0AIgn-H4xR2EBk&m=jLNFXvpu9gNdUeHi-G6sjWNCF9w4_AwhzzUDFZy2elE&s=-L6chFfv0OperrXHHpTF722WnH3FZIutn4cS16IvpOg&e=> ------------------------------ The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient. They may not be disclosed, used by or copied in any way by anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please return it to the sender (deleting the body of the email and attachments in your reply) and immediately and permanently delete it. Please note that Com Laude Group Limited (the “Com Laude Group”) does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. The Com Laude Group does not accept liability for statements which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of the group or one of its member entities. The Com Laude Group is a limited company registered in England and Wales with company number 10689074 and registered office at 30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England. The Com Laude Group includes Nom-IQ Limited t/a Com Laude, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 5047655 and registered office at 30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Valideus Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 6181291 and registered office at 30 Little Russell Street, London, WC1A 2HN England; Demys Limited, a company registered in Scotland with company number SC197176 and registered office at 15 William Street, South West Lane, Edinburgh, EH3 7LL Scotland; Consonum, Inc. dba Com Laude USA and Valideus USA, a corporation incorporated in the State of Washington and principal office address at Suite 332, Securities Building, 1904 Third Ave, Seattle, WA 98101; Com Laude (Japan) Corporation, a company registered in Japan with company number 0100-01-190853 and registered office at 1-3-21 Shinkawa, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, 104-0033, Japan; Com Laude Domain ESP S.L.U., a company registered in Spain and registered office address at Calle Barcas 2, 2, Valencia, 46002, Spain. For further information see www.comlaude.com <https://comlaude.com/> _______________________________________________ GNSO-SubProPendingRecs-ST mailing list -- gnso-subpropendingrecs-st@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to gnso-subpropendingrecs-st-leave@icann.org
_______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (5)
-
Anne ICANN -
Jeff Neuman -
Paul McGrady -
Steve Chan -
Susan Payne