String Confusion Edge Case (Continuing Discussion from Call)
All, Just to further explain my point from the call just now: In the situation where there is a string confusion objection against multiple strings, yes the easiest rules to implement would be that if one of the applicants does not pay the fees for the objection on time, would be that the non-paying applicant does not proceed no matter the outcome. *However, it is not necessarily the right outcome.* I can’t remember how much string confusion objections cost, but the fee was somewhere in the tens of thousands of dollars….not to mention the money you spend on legal counsel. Also keep in mind that “Loser Pays.” *Here is my scenario*: Objector A files a string confusion against applicants 1 and 2 believing that their applications should be in the same contention set as Objector A. Applicant wants to fight the objection and is willing to pay anything it takes to win. Applicant 2 believes, however, that the Objection has merit and does not mind the ultimate result that it ends up in adding Objector A to the contention set. It also has no interest in spending ten of thousands of dollars to fight a case it knows it is likely to lose (thereby losing all of the money they put into it since it is loser pays). . The “easiest solution” above would mean that Applicant 2 knowing it is likely to lose must still pay the money simply because Applicant 1 wants to fight. Yes, one could argue that Applicant 2 *could* benefit from Applicant 1’s fight (if in the off chance that it wins); But it is not fair to force Applicant 2 to pay for a fight simply because Applicant 1 does not want to concede. Solution: Add an option for Applicant 2 to plead “No Contest”. This means they would have to actually respond with that declaration, but they would not have to pay for Applicant 1s fight. By pleading no contest, it will put Applicant 1 on notice that it will be paying all the associated fees for the dispute resolution and it will be dragging along Applicant 2 if it wins. If Applicant 1 still wants to fight, so be it. If they no longer want to fight because Applicant 2 is not joining the fight, then Applicant 1 can change to plead “No contest” as well. This would result in a default and all of the applications will be in the same contention set. Most of the fees paid by the Objector will be refunded because the Panel was never technically constituted (Except for the quick look). Is my solution a little more complicated…perhaps…but I believe it is a better outcome than forcing Applicant 2 to pay to defend itself in a case it believes it will likely lose.
Em 3 de abr. de 2025, à(s) 11:26, Jeff Neuman via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> escreveu:
All,
Just to further explain my point from the call just now:
In the situation where there is a string confusion objection against multiple strings, yes the easiest rules to implement would be that if one of the applicants does not pay the fees for the objection on time, would be that the non-paying applicant does not proceed no matter the outcome. However, it is not necessarily the right outcome. I can’t remember how much string confusion objections cost, but the fee was somewhere in the tens of thousands of dollars….not to mention the money you spend on legal counsel. Also keep in mind that “Loser Pays.”
Administrative Filing Fees (non-refundable) • US $2750 Filing Fee; per party; per objection. This amount is due on all objections filed. • US $1250 Case Service Fee; per party; per objection. This additional amount only becomes due if any type of hearing is conducted in accordance with Article 19 of the gTLD Dispute Resolution Procedures. • All Administrative Fees are non-refundable. Neutral Panel Compensation (limited to one arbitrator) • US $6000 per objector/applicant. This is collected for all cases to be heard on documents only and includes all arbitrator expenses. • US $3000 per party. This is billed if any type of hearing is conducted. o Same amount billed for each additional day of hearing beyond one day. o Includes all travel time of the neutral. o Does not include travel expenses which will be billed separately So the most likely cost was USD 8750, and could go up to USD 13k plus travel expenses if a 1-day hearing occurred. Rubens
An example from 2012 may be useful. Google applied for .kid and Amazon and DotKids Foundation applied for .kids Google filed a string confusion objection, and DotKids did not respond (forgot if Amazon did I believe they also did not contend) because we believe it is correct that there is string confusion issue. Google ultimately won by default I believe, and the 3 applications were put into a contention set. DotKids was an Applicant Support Applicant, and did not have the resources to file to respond to the objection. Edmon From: Rubens Kuhl via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> Sent: Thursday, 3 April 2025 22:51 To: Lars Hoffmann via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org> Subject: [SubPro-IRT] Re: String Confusion Edge Case (Continuing Discussion from Call) � � � Em 3 de abr. de 2025, à(s) 11:26, Jeff Neuman via SubPro-IRT <subpro-irt@icann.org <mailto:subpro-irt@icann.org> > escreveu: � All, � Just to further explain my point from the call just now: � In the situation where there is a string confusion objection against multiple strings, yes the easiest rules to implement would be that if one of the applicants does not pay the fees for the objection on time, would be that the non-paying applicant does not proceed no matter the outcome. � � �However, it is not necessarily the right outcome. � I can’t remember how much string confusion objections cost, but the fee was somewhere in the tens of thousands of dollars….not to mention the money you spend on legal counsel. � Also keep in mind that “Loser Pays.” � � Administrative Filing Fees (non-refundable) • US $2750 Filing Fee; per party; per objection. This amount is due on all objections filed. • US $1250 Case Service Fee; per party; per objection. This additional amount only becomes due if any type of hearing is conducted in accordance with Article 19 of the gTLD Dispute Resolution Procedures. • All Administrative Fees are non-refundable. Neutral Panel Compensation (limited to one arbitrator) • US $6000 per objector/applicant. This is collected for all cases to be heard on documents only and includes all arbitrator expenses. • US $3000 per party. This is billed if any type of hearing is conducted. o Same amount billed for each additional day of hearing beyond one day. o Includes all travel time of the neutral. o Does not include travel expenses which will be billed separately � So the most likely cost was USD 8750, and could go up to USD 13k plus travel expenses if a 1-day hearing occurred. � � � � Rubens � � � � �
participants (3)
-
Edmon Chung -
Jeff Neuman -
Rubens Kuhl