RE: [gnso-idn-wg] One comment on techno-policy details

["olof nordling" <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Chun,

Thanks for your comments! One clarifying point, hopefully, would be that the
"confusingly similar" test (as conceived in the new gTLD recommendations)
would be applicable to concurrent applications for gTLD strings. Accordingly
(by way of example in ASCII), if an application for a string ".tuvw" is
received and another application (in the same script) is received for
".tuVw", where v and V symbolize variants (again for the sake of example
only), they would be considered "confusingly similar" in the string tests
and be handled in accordance with a specific procedure foreseen. Hence the
statement you refer to.

Very best regards

Olof

 

  _____  

From: owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Chun Eung Hwi
Sent: den 6 februari 2007 19:59
To: gnso-idn-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-idn-wg] One comment on techno-policy details

 

Dear all, 

 

I couldn't catch up the recent debates, but I want to make quick comment on
one issue of "limit confusion caused by variants", which I could read from
conference call 23 January overview - 2.2 as follows; 

 

2.2 Agreement to limit confusion and collisions due to variants. Agreement
that this may be a stability and security issue and part of the reserved
name process. Agreement that variants of an IDN gTLD string be treated in
analogy with current practice for IDN SLD labels, i.e. variants are not
available for registration by others. Agreement that this approach implies
certain "ex ante rights" with similarities to the "confusingly similar" test
foreseen in the New gTLD recommendations. Agreement that such "rights" must
not be confounded with IPR rights as such. Some support for enabling a
choice for an IDN gTLD strings with variants to only block variants or to
use variants as aliasing. 

 

What I want to clarify here is the fact that variants come from the same
language or the same language family. Therefore, the confusion or collision
happen in the same language or within the same language family as well. We
cannot use the term of variant in case when some translated or
transliterated or phonetically same or similar words (language script
labels) are to be taken into account. And obviously, in different languages
or in different language families, there is no longer confusion or collision
even when those  in respective language are similar or the same in graphics,
semantics and sound because different language scripts must be distinctive
itself. So, in this case, "confusingly similar" test cannot be applied.
Accordingly, across different language script labels, there should not be
any "ex ante rights" of the existing TLD label, and so any reserved name
policy would not necessarily be designed. 

 

 

regards,

 

Chun

-- 
---------------------
Chun Eung Hwi
General Secretary, PeaceNet Korea
chun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
pcs (+82) 19-259-2667
fax (+82)  2-2649-2624