ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


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

Comments for dispute section of the gTLD Applicant Guidebook Version 3

  • To: <3gtld-dispute@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Comments for dispute section of the gTLD Applicant Guidebook Version 3
  • From: "Alexey Mykhaylov" <alexey@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:26:53 -0800

Dear Gentlemen,


Please see my comments below: Please define what types of confusion are acceptable for filing an
objection. Is visual similarity the only factor considered?  I assume that
based on the confusion criteria if the string is found confusingly similar
with the existing string and the objection is satisfied, it may not be
registered by anyone else later as well.


3.2.3 I am not sure 30 days is always a sufficient time to file a response
to the objection, as this may involve priori negotiations (settlements) or
obtaining official papers. Considering significant investments at stake for
the applicant and unknown number of objections allowing more time might be
reasonable. Should be possible to allow objections / responses for IDN's in
the appropriate language - this way procedure will be more accessible for
local companies, translation could be provided by ICANN.


3.3.1. Is there a second fee for resubmitting new objection, previously
dismissed based on the administrative review?


3.3.2. Is there a cost difference for objector will his objection be
consolidated with others'.


3.3.4. For IDNs there must be a requirement for qualified panelist from the
appropriate country who is a native speaker of the language of the script. 


3.3.5. Cost should not be a factor limiting in-person hearings that can
these days be cheaply conducted over the Internet. This is a key principle
to ensure transparency and fairness of the decision. Too many decisions are
already taken behind the closed doors and lead to unresolved situations (for
example  - .ua domain).


3.4.2.(1) There should be no opportunity for existing TLD operators to
object using any other mechanism, except string confusion. Legal rights
mechanism should not allow current and new operators of ASCII TLDs to block
concepts on the same meaning in other languages. 


Because of the high costs and resources required for the rollout of global
ASCII gTLD, such as application, marketing, support, travel etc local
companies may only be capable and have interest and ambition the to
implement local IDN domain. Of course, if company applying for ASCII TLD may
block IDN domains with "similar meaning" local companies who would like to
implement local domains and services (good for community) will not be able
to compete with wealthy players, who might block this IDN zone for future
without community benefit, which defeats the purpose of IDN introductions. 


3.4.2.(4) This clause should not contain "or operates TLDs or". If there is
a legal issue with existing TLD operation it should be resolved using
available legal means - ICANN is not a legal authority.


Best regards,

Alexey Mykhaylov


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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy