ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Comment on - "similarity of meaning" clause

  • To: <2gtld-evaluation@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Comment on - "similarity of meaning" clause
  • From: "Alexey Mykhaylov" <alexey@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2009 13:52:04 -0700

Re: section


Even though "similarity of meaning" clause in the string confusion review
and objection is not defined clearly enough to understand the exact
mechanism and logic behind it, no level of clarification can make it work in
the IDN world as it is impossible to claim superiority of one language over
another. If this means that a registry (which could be both private and
government-controlled) operating a gTLD in any language will own the "right"
to this concept cross all languages - it can't work. Beyond the problem of
"national security" brought up by representatives of many countries, who
would like to have more control over their government, education,
scientific, etc domains in their own language, this would defeat the purpose
of the IDN introduction altogether as local companies will still not be able
to operate the domain names of their choice in their language. Domain names
with "similar meaning" in different language do not present any confusion to
users unless the visual similarity condition applies, as well as they serve
different regional markets, so this concern has no ground. Even within one
language such clause seems to lead to potential conflicts as several
countries may share the same language, but may choose to independently
operate gTLDs of "similar meaning", as well as several private companies may
wish to compete for serving the "similar concept" gTLDs differently - there
is nothing wrong with competition as this is the primary driver of the
progress. The introduction of the latest gTLDs was a good example of how it
is not sufficient to simply make a new gTLD available any more, that
companies want to provide innovative services as a part of their offerings
(.mobi, .tel) to differentiate themselves and it is not a good approach to
unnaturally limit the competition where no user confusion is present. 


Same for phonetic similarity - this should not be a reason for determining
confusion. Some concepts that could be used for gTLDs could sound similar in
unrelated languages that are used across the globe from each other, and the
fact that one should have superiority over another does not seem reasonable.



Best Regards,

Alexey Mykhaylov

http://www.ukrnames.com <http://www.ukrnames.com/> 


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy