<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi All,</p>
<p>Tx you for appointing Cara Gagliano from the Electronic Frontier
Foundation. She and I were both able to speak in today's meeting.</p>
<p>Following up on our discussion below, we raised many concerns
about the "collapse" of future applications for singular and
plural gTLDs into a single content set, and the harm that will
take place to noncommercial speech. .SPRING (for seasons) and
.SPRINGS for elastic objects, according to the SubPro Working
Group, should be allowed to co-exist. Yet, under these proposed
rules, as we discussed earlier, they will go into "contention
sets" with the deepest commercial pockets winning the auctions,
and much noncommercial speech will be lost.</p>
<p>As Cara said, this proposed rule for throwing all singular and
plural new gTLD strings into one contention set is both overly
inclusive and overbroad - and we never want that result when it
comes to Free Expression. She's right!</p>
<p><i><b>It's a busy season, but how about a short session to
discuss this matter with our community - does Friday work
(same time as today's candidates' session)? </b>(Our next
SubPro Small Team Plus meeting is next Monday, 6/3).</i></p>
<p>Best, Kathy<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:67f99a62-23db-4d5d-a138-3b00de078041@KathyKleiman.com">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/22/2024 2:03 PM, Emmanuel Vitus
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAGKde+1cGeH3L6BpB4Rx8A2ZfX9LwQfAG9gRKFDFz1wzO6jhiw@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type"
content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><span
id="m_-45463125347352252gmail-docs-internal-guid-d6caa795-7fff-17b9-d087-5ad7613e8499">
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.38;text-align:justify;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><font
face="trebuchet ms, sans-serif">Hi Kathy,<br>
Thanks for sharing this.<br>
I still don’t get why the Board worries that allowing
singular and plural forms of gTLDs will make them
delve too much into “content.” Were there any
practical examples of arguments given to support this
concern?<br>
I completely agree that delegations must be in the
same language to avoid confusion. For example, in
Spanish, “casa” (house) and “casas” (houses) shouldn’t
both be delegated as gTLDs since they are simply
singular and plural forms of the same word. However, I
agree that if they are just homonyms, they should be
allowed to be delegated. For instance, in English,
“bank” (financial institution) and “bank” (side of a
river) are homonyms and could be delegated as they
represent different meanings<span
class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">,
but on a first come first serve basis</span>.
Similarly, in French, “cour” (court) and “cours”
(lessons) are homonyms and should be treated as
separate entities.<br>
<br>
I’m strongly against the proposal to exclude future
trademarked gTLDs from these rules. As you mentioned,
there’s no legal precedent for such a rule, and it
clearly doesn’t favor non-commercial stakeholders. For
instance, if a commercial <span class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">french </span>entity
applied for .SOLIDARITE <span class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">(solidarity) </span>as
a brand, a non-commercial organization wanting to use
.SOLIDARITES<span class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
(solidarities)</span> to promote unity and support
in communities would be unfairly blocked. Similarly,
.LIBERTE <span class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">(freedom) </span>for
a brand could block .LIBERTES<span
class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
(freedoms) </span> for a human rights organization.
These examples show how such exclusions could severely
disadvantage non-commercial interests.<br>
<br>
We should oppose this. Non-commercial entities often
don’t have the resources for trademarks or the
priority given to them<span class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
(</span>as we discussed in the recent Trademark
Clearinghouse conversation regarding the IDNs EPDP
report<span class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">)</span>.
The internet should be for everyone.<span
class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
My 2cent. </span><br>
<span class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Thanks. </span> </font><br>
</p>
</span><span class="gmail_default"
style="font-family:"trebuchet ms",sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Emmanuel
Vitus </span><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le mer. 22 mai 2024
à 15:00, Kathy Kleiman <<a
href="mailto:Kathy@kathykleiman.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Kathy@kathykleiman.com</a>>
a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">To NCSG Policy Committee,</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I have been asked to circulate the
Singular/Plurals ideas of the SubPro Small Team Plus
created by Council to reconcile recommendations of the
SubPro Working Group rejected by the ICANN Board, <b><i><a
href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/19AckdQ_GkPaqCkwcfWdnu8eSKK4YliRjYuP2iVBh4Vs/edit?usp=sharing"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://docs.google.com/document/d/19AckdQ_GkPaqCkwcfWdnu8eSKK4YliRjYuP2iVBh4Vs/edit?usp=sharing</a>
</i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The problem is singular and plural
gTLDs. In the First Round of New gTLDs, in 2012,
singulars and plurals went forward. The idea was that
one registry might use .SPRING for domain names about
seasons and another might use .SPRINGS for metal
coils. A wide use of words has always been NCSG’s
position: that there are many meanings for words and
we should allow them to flourish in domain names and
gTLDs.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is what the SubPro Working
Group recommended, but the ICANN Board expressed
concerns and said no. The Board worries that they will
be forced to inquire too deeply into the “content” of
a future gTLD – how it will be used – rather than
analyzing what the gTLD looks like only. As you know,
ICANN cannot regulate “content” under its new Bylaws.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The SubPro Small Team Plus returned
to the Board and offered to put into the same
contention set future plural such as .example and
.examples – these are likely “confusingly similar” to
Internet users and only one should be delegated. And
singular/plurals must be in<i> the same language </i>(not
across languages). </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i>Please look at the Board’s
current proposal, from the perspective of the
languages we speak, and the similarities and
differences of singulars and plurals, <a
href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/19AckdQ_GkPaqCkwcfWdnu8eSKK4YliRjYuP2iVBh4Vs/edit?usp=sharing"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://docs.google.com/document/d/19AckdQ_GkPaqCkwcfWdnu8eSKK4YliRjYuP2iVBh4Vs/edit?usp=sharing</a>
We will be debating this <br>
"compromise proposal" (that comes from ICANN Org)
on Tuesday at the next Small Team Plus meeting. <br>
</i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Unfortunately, Jeff Neuman just
added language to remove future trademarked gTLDs
(.BRANDS) from these rules completely. I am concerned
as that would elevate commercial gTLD uses over
noncommercial gTLD uses. I can envision a Liberty Gas
Station (a chain in the US) that wants .LIBERTY and a
noncommercial group that wants .LIBERTIES to promote
rights in their countries and communities, and a few
similar ones. The noncommercial .LIBERTIES is blocked
and the commercial .LIBERTY gas station goes forward.
I know of no legal precedent for such a rule. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Please let me know your thoughts –
soon –as the SubTeam meets again on Tuesday. </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Best regards and tx, </p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Kathy</p>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
NCSG-PC mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>