RE: [gnso-idng] 3rd Draft on Sting Similarity

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'm okay with either version (Eric's last, or Chucks current draft),
with one request. That it state that our intent is not to redefine or
revisit the definition of "confusingly similar" as currently implented
in DAGv3, but only to point out two problems that may arise based on how
the test for "confusingly similar" is applied. Or something like that.

Tim
 
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [gnso-idng] 3rd Draft on Sting Similarity
From: "Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, December 15, 2009 8:23 am
To: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>, <gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx>


Avri,

What in my rewrite assumes that translation is the primary cause for
'confusingly similar'? 

I disagree with you that we all agree that visual similarity as the
lowest common denominator. I agree that it is one important possible
source of similarity and the one that initial checks will look for but
it is only one of several sources of similarity. That doesn't
necessarily make it the lowest common denominator. 

I have not problem with adding other types of examples. Note that I
didn't add any examples but only used those that were already included.
If we want to add some more examples of different types, that is fine
with me.

Chuck 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 3:37 AM
> To: gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-idng] 3rd Draft on Sting Similarity
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> My problem with your re-write is that it presupposes that 
> translation is a primary cause for 'confusingly similar' and 
> as I and others have argued, this is not universally accepted 
> (though I do accept meaning as a possible complicating factor 
> in an objection, I am not sure others even go that far).
> 
> 
> If we are going to include examples we should include example 
> of 'beneficial similarity' based on the lowest common 
> denominator condition of visual similarity with which we all 
> agree. Something with the variation in Chinese or simplified 
> or perhaps something even from LDH/extended ASCII 
> (.aero/.æro), or even a cyrillic/LDH example (.сом/.com)
> 
> a.
> 
> On 14 Dec 2009, at 16:34, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
> 
> > Please accept my apologies for not being able to do this 
> earlier but 
> > my time has been spread really thin. I made a lot of 
> proposed edits 
> > and inserted quite a few comments that are all highlighted in the 
> > attached file. I started doing this late last week and since then 
> > there has been been a lot of list discussion, so I tried to 
> check my 
> > edits against recent comments but found that somewhat 
> challenging. In 
> > some cases I think my edits were consistent with some of the 
> > suggestions but in others they may not be.
> > 
> > Chuck
> > 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:owner-gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Ruiz
> >> Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 10:22 AM
> >> To: gnso-idng@xxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: RE: [gnso-idng] 3rd Draft on Sting Similarity
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Thanks Eric. I'm good with it.
> >> 
> >> Tim
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> > <IDNG Message to Council re confusingly similar strings - Gomes 
> > version.doc>
> 
> 
>