Page History

...

On 24 June 2013, as requested by the GAC, the Board New gTLD Program Committee (NGPC) considered the issue of singular and plural stings being confusingly similar and decided to let the original process stand (subject to individual objections).

Events and findings which have occurred since then indicate that the transparent, predictable and objective criteria called for by the GNSO New gTLD Policy recommendations 1 and 9 have not been met, ultimately resulting in Internet end-user confusion.

...

The ALAC is particularly concerned with the issue of singular vs plural strings. A central issue is that the "confusingly similar" test relies purely on visual similarity. Based on the initial evaluation (and the adding an "S" makes it a recognizably different string. The recent NGPC decision - (http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/minutes-new-gtld-25jun13-en.htm#2.d), adding an "S" makes it a recognizably different string, re-affirms this position, although several Board members expressed regret that the wording of the Applicant Guidebook effectively forced this outcome.

The Applicant Guidebook section 2.2.1.1 describes the string similarity review:

...

If both singular and plural TLDs are delegated:

...

•  Some registrants would register (and defend) their 2^nd level names in both TLDs and map them to the same web and e-mail services. This would reduce the impact on users, but would of course increase costs to registrants who must double their registrations. Moreover, due to either policy differences between the two TLDs, or due to timing constraints, such duplication may not be possible.

...

• Other registrants would use only one of the TLDs, resulting in quasi-random behavior from a user’s perspective. One cannot expect the typical Internet user to be able to differentiate between two such name spaces, and therefore the ALAC, which is responsible for representing the interests of Internet users in ICANN, believes that we have a genuine case of "confusingly similar."

The ALAC advises the Board to revisit the issue of new TLD strings which are singular and plural versions of the same word, and ensure that ICANN does not delegate strings that are virtually certain to create confusion among Internet users and therefore result in loss of faith in the DNS.

The ALAC is also concerned with the lack of predictability and consistency in objection decisions. Certainly allowing identical strings to be individually evaluated (based on different arguments and by different panelists) does not appear to have been a wise move. Moreover the clear lack of consistency among the evaluations of different panellists panelists implies that overall, we will put either some TLDs in contention sets where it is not justified, or delegate strings that will cause user confusion.

It is not clear how this can be fixed at this time, but proceeding with no change is either going to unfairly disadvantage some applicants and their target markets or cause certain user confusion.

The ALAC advises the Board to review not only the obvious cases such as .cam/com where conflicting objection decision have forced such review, but the general case and determine a viable way forward which will not create contention sets where it is unwarranted, nor delegate multiple TLDs destined to ensure user confusion and implicit loss of faith in the DNS.