The objection process has given rise to some laughable results

[Jean Guillon <jean@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Once again ICANN appears to be making up the rules as they go along. To be
fair, the original rules were full of holes, but by changing them after the
game has started, that is more than unusual, it is patently unfair.

Whilst no one would deny that the objection process has given rise to some
laughable results (shop and 通販 are confusingly similar?), how can they
single out just two sets of strings for review? ICANN already absolved
themselves of responsibility by asking third parties to make these sorts of
determinations for them. Some may say that was a smart move. So why now are
they doing exactly the opposite, by selecting just a couple of string
confusion decisions for review, when panellists have made much worse
decisions and been more inconsistent? Surely any review must be all or
nothing?

-- 
*Jean Guillon*
Mobile: +33.631109837
Contact info: Guillon.tel <http://guillon.tel/>