At-Large Proposed Review Mechanism to Address Perceived Inconsistent Expert Determinations on String Confusion Objections Workspace

At-Large Proposed Review Mechanism to Address Perceived Inconsistent Expert Determinations on String Confusion Objections Workspace

Comment Close
Date

Statement
Name 

Status

Assignee(s) and
RALO(s)

Call for
Comments

Call for
Comments
Close 

Vote
Announcement 

Vote Open

Vote
Reminder

Vote Close

Date of Submission

Staff Contact and Email

Statement Number

Comment Close
Date

Statement
Name 

Status

Assignee(s) and
RALO(s)

Call for
Comments

Call for
Comments
Close 

Vote
Announcement 

Vote Open

Vote
Reminder

Vote Close

Date of Submission

Staff Contact and Email

Statement Number

11.03.2014

Proposed Review Mechanism to Address Perceived Inconsistent Expert Determinations on String Confusion Objections

adopted15Y, 0N, 0A

@Alan Greenberg (NARALO)

20.02.2014

28.02.2014
12:00 UTC 

28.02.2014

28.02.2014
20:00 UTC

06.03.2014

07.03.2014
20:00 UTC 

07.03.2014

Christine Willett
christine.willet@icann.org 

AL-ALAC-ST-0314-02-00

For more information about this PC, please click here

 

FINAL VERSION TO BE SUBMITTED IF RATIFIED

 

FINAL DRAFT VERSION TO BE VOTED UPON BY THE ALAC

The ALAC supports the details of the process described, but recommends that it be widened to include cases such as the various .shop objections where the objected-to strings were not identical, but the results were just as inconsistent. Moreover, the ALAC notes that it has previously made statements to this effect (https://icann-community.atlassian.net/wiki/download/attachments/104464386/AL-ALAC-ST-0913-04-01-EN.pdf?api=v2) and deeply regrets that it has taken ICANN so long to react to the overall situation that it must now choose to accept many of the other seemingly illogical results. One of the ALAC's prime responsibilities in ICANN is to protect the interests of individual Internet users, and the delegation of confusingly similar TLDs does not meet the needs of these users.

FIRST DRAFT SUBMITTED

The ALAC supports the details of the process described, but recommends that it be widened to include cases such as the various .shop objections where the objected-to strings were not identical, but the results were just as inconsistent. Moreover, the ALAC deeply regrets that it has taken ICANN so long to react to the overall situation that it must now choose to accept many of the other seemingly illogical results.