[Gnso-rpm-data] Beta Testers' Feedback - Review by COB Monday

Mon Aug 20 12:35:13 UTC 2018

I want to thank Susan and Lori for doing so much of what I had planned on doing; bless you.  I am basically in agreement with Susan though I will go further and say I think it's silly and perhaps counterproductive to add a definition of a domain name.  I have no objection to saying more about new gTLDs versus legacy.

As for the Q6 "how did you react to a claims notice" issue, I believe we'd drafted it with the intent of asking about their first time receiving a notice, then asking if they did anything differently next time/s and if so what/why.  I have no strong feelings about this but hope only for consistency.  I see how the first version could be confusing, but perhaps we could begin Q6 with something like "If you received multiple claims notices, we'd like you to focus now on the first one you received." Then proceed to Q6 and its children.

For Q7, the option  “To inform me that someone else previously registered the domain name I have selected”, we agreed to remove that and it shouldn't be there at all, reworded or not.  I would like AG to confirm that this will be done, given its persistence through a couple of rounds now.  [Just a note for everyone else as we go through this--we won't necessarily see the options in the same order since they are randomized!  Our beta testers probably won't know that but we should keep that in mind and quote the actual options rather than numbers in our discussion.]

I hope that feedback will not automatically be incorporated unless we're ok with it, given the time we've already spent.  E.g., the suggested change to Q13 strikes me as pointless and requiring too much work to fix--at this point we risk introducing errors as well as fixes.

Rebecca Tushnet
Frank Stanton Professor of First Amendment Law, Harvard Law School
703 593 6759
________________________________
From: Gnso-rpm-data <gnso-rpm-data-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Susan Payne <susan.payne at valideus.com>
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 7:49:00 AM
To: Ariel Liang; gnso-rpm-data at icann.org
Subject: Re: [Gnso-rpm-data] Beta Testers' Feedback - Review by COB Monday

Thanks Ariel.

All – my thoughts below.

Susan Payne
Head of Legal Policy | Valideus Ltd

E: susan.payne at valideus.com<mailto:susan.payne at valideus.com>
D: +44 20 7421 8255
T: +44 20 7421 8299
M: +44 7971 661175

From: Gnso-rpm-data [mailto:gnso-rpm-data-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Ariel Liang
Sent: 17 August 2018 20:08
To: gnso-rpm-data at icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-rpm-data] Beta Testers' Feedback - Review by COB Monday

Dear Data Sub Team members (and Rebecca in particular),

Beta testers have reviewed the actual/potential registrant surveys. Test link: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/p3772093.aspx?mode=2<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_p3772093.aspx-3Fmode-3D2&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=XeuBEZIEcZjlRmqwRRV1oeGHlPQGzSNIGFk3haFQl5g&e=>

Please see below a summary of feedback/suggestion from the beta testers, with reference to the question number and URL for context/details. While the feedback is mostly cosmetic, we do want to make sure the Data Sub Team is okay with any potential change.

By COB Monday, 20 August, please be so kind to let us know whether you agree or disagree with the input from beta testers, OR whether you have alternative suggestions. Analysis Group will implement the changes accordingly.

Thank you for your time and help!

Best Regards,

Mary, Julie, Ariel, and Berry

==

INTRO: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/p3772093.aspx?r=61&s=VMFNEKFJ&__goto=INTRO<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D61-26s-3DVMFNEKFJ-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DINTRO&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=ZYJ-tTyNCgT4mwcrnqViMCNXycQeVfdgKCKkLzE3wGY&e=>

  *   Consider adding definition of gTLDs, new gTLDs, domain name in the intro (based on ICANN glossary):
     *   Domain name: “The domain name identifies a specific address on the Internet that belongs to an entity such as a company, organization, institution, or individual. A domain name consists of two or more textual segments separated by dots.”
     *   gTLD: “gTLDs are the class of top-level domains that includes general-purpose domains such as .com, .net, .edu, and .org. This class also includes domains associated with the New Generic Top-Level Domain Program<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.icann.org_icann-2Dacronyms-2Dand-2Dterms_en_G0167&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=ZyvtMabQD1d1yZzFBkwquA9If5qDxO1Nzp138WekIX0&e=> (New gTLD Program), which includes names such as .futbol, .istanbul, and .pizza, and names in other alphabets and languages.”

[Susan: I am assuming this is the survey for registrants/potential registrants.  For those groups to be qualified to answer then I’d like to think they know what a domain name and a gTLD is.  But I don’t have an overwhelming objection to adding these definitions.  However I think if we are going to give a couple of examples for what is a new gTLD we ought to also give a couple of examples for what is a domain name too.  Maybe facebook.com and icann.org?]

Q1: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/p3772093.aspx?r=61&s=VMFNEKFJ&__goto=Q1<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D61-26s-3DVMFNEKFJ-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ1&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=GOXMM3PF6Cfovjv5jiOB2dsLexuhOSDCq2Tjz5Lv2-0&e=>

  *   Revise pop-up message linked to “here”:
     *   Clarify the “strings” are the new gTLDs when preceded by a dot.  [Susan: If we are including the definitions above then we have already told people what a new gTLD is.  In any event I think this sentence (Over 1,300 new names or "strings" could become available in the next few years.) is now misleading as it refers to a time before the new gTLDs were rolling out – many of the 1300 are already available now.

Maybe we just say something like the following to replace all of that text “As a result of the New gTLD Program a large number of new gTLDs have now been delegated into the root zone of the internet and have been, or shortly will be launched. These include the following, please note that some new gTLDs may not be included in the list below”  ]

     *   This sentence in the pop-up message is unclear: “After completing the New gTLD Program, a new gTLD becomes part of the Internet when it is delegated”.
     *   Delete this sentence: “This means it is introduced into the Internet's authoritative database, known as the Root Zone”.
     *   Rephrase the last sentence to: “Please note that some new TLDs may not be included in the list below”.
  *   The second answer option should start with “Yes” (“Yes, I attempted to register a domain name in a new gTLD but did not complete the registration”). [Susan: I think this makes sense – but it depends on how you funnel the answers for the rest of the survey.]

Q3: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/p3772093.aspx?r=61&s=VMFNEKFJ&__goto=Q3<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D61-26s-3DVMFNEKFJ-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ3&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=zS_C1gIa-e2SEmpj5Gz5bu_XrMKiIqZr4P2nBfS4l8Y&e=>

·         Remove “Don’t know/not sure” option, and ask respondents to provide an approximate range based on the options above [Susan: disagree.  If they can provide an approximate range they will already do so.  Maybe we should reword the question to: To the best of your recollection how many domain names have you attempted to register in new gTLDs within the past five years?]

Q4: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/3/p3772093.aspx?r=61&s=VMFNEKFJ&__goto=Q4<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_3_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D61-26s-3DVMFNEKFJ-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ4&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=d_oO1ZEjOyZIiiePhQ01AXq-M8aRc_aCrJzGqVcnBAQ&e=>

  *   Remove “Don’t know/not sure” option, and ask respondents to provide an approximate range based on the options above [Susan – same comment as above]

Q5: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/3/p3772093.aspx?r=61&s=VMFNEKFJ&__goto=Q5<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_3_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D61-26s-3DVMFNEKFJ-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ5&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=U18xOLdve8PQaC-OedTu0gH-BDFpdSrLK4I7EIgPcUs&e=>

  *   In the intro, emphasize that ccTLDs and legacy TLDs are not being considered. Provide examples of ccTLDs and legacy TLDs in case respondents don’t click the hyperlinked “here”.  [Susan: fine]

Q6a: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/3/p3772093.aspx?r=61&s=VMFNEKFJ&__goto=Q6a<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_3_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D61-26s-3DVMFNEKFJ-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ6a&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=jMiP5q_t35CuC1rQ8T3X1uWEvEfMRCR2dH1e3u78Meo&e=>

  *   Rephrase the question to: “Did you register one or more domain names for which you received a Claims Notice?” [Susan: I think this makes sense unless we’re asking questions about a single experience – from later questions it seems like this might have been asking about the first experience of seeing a claims notice, and if so then the question is correct as drafted]

Q6b: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/p3772093.aspx?r=61&s=VMFNEKFJ&__goto=Q6b<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D61-26s-3DVMFNEKFJ-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ6b&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=0WxRvEZC0Z6kPb3qssCduINTmwo0pGqFiOrI2w9voYw&e=>

  *   Rephrase the question to: “How much time do you recall spending reading the Claims Notice?” [Susan: fine – assuming this is a question about reading the Claims Notice]

Q6c: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/p3772093.aspx?r=61&s=VMFNEKFJ&__goto=Q6c<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D61-26s-3DVMFNEKFJ-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ6c&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=9CNsigfi3X07TsoHLy6RxMSuSD-cthJxVUxf8G2wA9U&e=>

  *   Add an open text field for answer option 1 and option 2, similar to the other answer options. [Susan: it seems like 1 and 2 are options where they have already given us the reason, whereas later options are for new/different reasons and so need the open text box.  Maybe we should amend options one and two to say “…always for the same reasons given in question X”]

Q7: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/p3772093.aspx?r=61&s=VMFNEKFJ&__goto=Q7<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D61-26s-3DVMFNEKFJ-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ7&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=6Bly-Q3xxEUgVejUsa4gyHGKrLCu4-jbaGX77BJemOY&e=>

  *   Rephrase answer option 3 to: “To inform me about the potential rights of trademark owners against me should I proceed to complete registration of my selected domain name” [Susan: This is what’s intended.  If beta test feedback is that the current wording is unclear then I don’t object to changing it.]
  *   Rephrase answer option 4 to: “To inform me that someone else previously registered the domain name I have selected” [Susan: This is what’s intended.  If beta test feedback is that the current wording is unclear then I don’t object to changing it – but subject to my suggested edit.]
  *   Rephrase answer option 5 to: “To inform me that there is a trademark owner with a trademark or a protected string/term that matches the domain name I have selected” [Susan: This is what’s intended.  If beta test feedback is that the current wording is unclear then I don’t object to changing it – but subject to my suggested edit.]
  *   Add an open text field next to answer option 6 “None of the above” to ask respondents to provide reason(s). [Susan: no objection, although presumably it will be more work to sift the answers]

Q8: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/3/p3772093.aspx?r=61&s=VMFNEKFJ&__goto=Q8<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_3_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D61-26s-3DVMFNEKFJ-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ8&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=X1zx9ozNC6x30_Q-qiH1DK7eOu2ROPLoETzpBlfu1ow&e=>

  *   Rephrase the answer option 1 to: “Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS) or Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) Complaint notice” [Susan: fine]
  *   Rephrase the answer option 3 to: “Notice of a lawsuit for trademark infringement” [Susan: I can’t see what’s wrong with existing language]
  *   Add an answer option: “No, I have not received any warnings or notices of possible trademark conflict regarding my choice of domain name” [Susan: agree, we need a NO option.  It should come as option 4]

Q8c1: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/3/p3772093.aspx?r=64&s=JZYXUYWE&__goto=Q8c1<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_3_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D64-26s-3DJZYXUYWE-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ8c1&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=N_ZGQU5liEPI8aV7z-R3cLaus5ubX35ISMJ9hvsUC4w&e=>

  *   Rephrase the question to: “How much time do you recall spending reading the Claims Notice?” [Susan:  fine – assuming this is a question about reading the Claims Notice.  But need to check that this is the case because, if so, why are they being asked the same Q in 6b and 8c1?]

Q8d: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/p3772093.aspx?r=64&s=JZYXUYWE&__goto=Q8d<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D64-26s-3DJZYXUYWE-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ8d&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=R-P2V9tbGG0QSe-oOZ-95ybPnptWgieBG1AKPbVK9jg&e=>

  *   Rephrase answer option 3 to: “To inform me that there is a trademark owner with a trademark or a protected string/term that matches the domain name I have selected” [Susan: This is what’s intended.  If beta test feedback is that the current wording is unclear then I don’t object to changing it – but subject to my suggested edit.]

Q10: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/p3772093.aspx?r=64&s=JZYXUYWE&__goto=Q10<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D64-26s-3DJZYXUYWE-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ10&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=wwvAgX2M2qjars_8TgsBHo2Z59NxBoCO2_UuYK5rPo4&e=>

  *   Rephrase answer option 1 to: “I have a business/program/initiative that uses that name or something very similar” (noncommercial, not for profit, advocacy purpose is missing in the original wording) ). [Susan: no objection]
  *   Rephrase answer option 2 to: “I am thinking of starting a business/program/initiative using that name” (noncommercial, not for profit, advocacy purpose is missing in the original wording) ). [Susan: no objection]
  *   Add an answer option: “I have a trademark which contains the domain name string” ). [Susan: no objection]

Q13: https://online.ssisurveys.com/wix/p3772093.aspx?r=64&s=JZYXUYWE&__goto=Q13<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__online.ssisurveys.com_wix_p3772093.aspx-3Fr-3D64-26s-3DJZYXUYWE-26-5F-5Fgoto-3DQ13&d=DwMGaQ&c=WO-RGvefibhHBZq3fL85hQ&r=E-M4OQvQBo8UWqE1LwEiDR3PcWlfM0I-0jiI1c4ous0&m=q6nxSlSVtXjzg2V4KzWd9ZojoTrW3YOCxostwXQ_tFc&s=zhj4XmYgYaSq9GqGKfgaVKfFmGV_m2na8lW4uOzE-4Q&e=>

  *   Replace “my country” with “the country of my current residence” in all answer options [Susan:  the question asks about country of current residence so this seems unnecessary to me.  But if there was a lot of feedback that this might be understood then I guess you could add this to all options.  You will have to re-order the wording so the sentences read properly]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-rpm-data/attachments/20180820/098a2411/attachment-0001.html>