<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Wingdings;
panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:91628628;
mso-list-template-ids:-1195897480;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Symbol;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:o;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:bullet;
mso-level-text:;
mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;
mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Wingdings;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">All,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">A group of registry operators came up with some recommendations for Subsequent Procedures including recommendations on string similarity and string confusion objections. As this is still being reviewed by the RySG as a whole it does not
have any formal status yet. That said, these recommendations apply to the subject matter for our meeting in a few hours. Therefore, I am submitting this in my personal capacity for now. I look forward to discussing these on the call.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">************************************************************************************<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">Recommendation 1: String Similarity Review</span></u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">It is the opinion of the String Sub-team that GNSO Policy #2 is satisfactory for the purpose of String Similarity. GNSO Policy #2 states: “Strings
must not be confusingly similar to an existing top</span><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Cambria Math",serif;color:#222222;background:white">‐</span><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">level
domain or a Reserved Name.”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">It is our recommendation that implementation of this policy can be improved pertaining to applications received by ICANN for singular and plural
strings. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">More specifically, the scope of the String Similarity Review should be broadened to encompass single/plurals of TLDs on a per-language basis in
addition to the existing visual similarity standard. Contention sets would be formed on a per-language basis. A dictionary will be the tool used to determine the singular and/or plural version of the string for the specific language. In this expanded process,
applications for single/plural variations of each string would be placed in a contention set and applications for a single/plural variations of an existing string would not be permitted.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">By way of example, if applications were submitted for the strings .gâteau, .gâteaux, .cake, and .cakes, then the strings .gâteau and .gâteux (French)
would be placed in contention with one another, but not with the corresponding translations .cake and .cakes (English), which would comprise a separate contention set. Additional contention sets could continue to be formed through the String Confusion Objection
Process. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">Recommendation 2: String Confusion Objections</span></u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">During the 2015 round, the String Confusion Objection process resulted in indirect contention situations for identical strings proposing similar
use cases. For example, in one objection determination, the strings .car/.cars were determined to be confusingly similar, while in another they were determined to not be confusingly similar. This resulted in a situation where the ability or inability for the
two strings to coexist depended on which party prevailed at auction.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">This outcome was seen as inconsistent by many in the community (both objectors and respondents) and saw late stage intervention by the ICANN board
to introduce a limited appeals process. The appeals process was only made available to the applicants who were placed in contention, and not to the party filing the objection.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">We believe that these could be largely avoided by allowing a single String Confusion Objection to be filed against all applicants for a particular
string, rather than requiring a unique objection to be filed against each application. We propose the following:</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<ul style="margin-top:0in" type="disc">
<li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#222222;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;background:white;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">An objector could file a single objection that would extend to all applications for an identical string.</span><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#222222;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;background:white;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">Given that an objection that encompassed several applications would still require greater work to process and review, the string confusion panel could introduce a tiered pricing structure
for these sets. Each applicant for that identical string would still prepare a response to the objection.</span><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#222222;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;background:white;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">The same panel would review all documentation associated with the objection. Each response would be reviewed on its own merits to determine whether it was confusingly similar.</span><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#222222;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;background:white;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">The panel would issue a single determination that identified which applications would be in contention. Any outcome that resulted in an indirect contention would be explained as part
of the response. </span><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></li><li class="MsoNormal" style="color:#222222;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;background:white;vertical-align:baseline">
<span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;background:white">A limited appeals process should be available to both the objectors and the respondents to handle perceived inconsistencies.</span><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p></o:p></span></li></ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">Recommendation 3: Sword Tool</span></u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222;background:white">We recommend that ICANN do away with the Sword Tool that was presented to applicants as part of the 2012 round. There was little correlation between
the Sword Results and the actual outcomes of the String Similarity Review and String Confusion Objection Process and, thus, that the tool was more misleading to applicants than helpful.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#0F9347">Jeffrey J. Neuman</span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#0F9347">Senior Vice President </span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4F4F4F">|</span><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#C39209">Valideus
USA</span></b><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#C32830">
</span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4F4F4F">| </span><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#C32830">Com Laude USA</span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4F4F4F">1751 Pinnacle Drive, Suite 600<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4F4F4F">Mclean, VA 22102, United States<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4F4F4F">E:
</span><u><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#00B050"><a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@valideus.com"><span style="color:#00B050">jeff.neuman@valideus.com</span></a></span></u><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#595959">
or </span><u><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#00B050"><a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com"><span style="color:#00B050">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</span></a></span></u><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#00B050">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4F4F4F">T: +1.703.635.7514<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4F4F4F">M: +1.202.549.5079<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#4F4F4F">@Jintlaw<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>