[NCSG-PC] Singulars/Plurals in New gTLDs and future rounds

[Kathy Kleiman]

Hi All,

Tx you for appointing Cara Gagliano from the Electronic Frontier 
Foundation. She and I were both able to speak in today's meeting.

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.

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!

/*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)? *(Our next SubPro Small Team Plus meeting is next 
Monday,  6/3)./

Best, Kathy


> On 5/22/2024 2:03 PM, Emmanuel Vitus wrote:
>>
>> Hi Kathy,
>> Thanks for sharing this.
>> 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?
>> 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, but on a first come first serve basis. Similarly, 
>> in French, “cour” (court) and “cours” (lessons) are homonyms and 
>> should be treated as separate entities.
>>
>> 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 french entity applied for 
>> .SOLIDARITE (solidarity) as a brand, a non-commercial organization 
>> wanting to use .SOLIDARITES(solidarities) to promote unity and 
>> support in communities would be unfairly blocked. Similarly, .LIBERTE 
>> (freedom) for a brand could block .LIBERTES(freedoms) for a human 
>> rights organization. These examples show how such exclusions could 
>> severely disadvantage non-commercial interests.
>>
>> We should oppose this. Non-commercial entities often don’t have the 
>> resources for trademarks or the priority given to them(as we 
>> discussed in the recent Trademark Clearinghouse conversation 
>> regarding the IDNs EPDP report). The internet should be for 
>> everyone.My 2cent.
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Emmanuel Vitus
>>
>> Le mer. 22 mai 2024 à 15:00, Kathy Kleiman <Kathy at kathykleiman.com> a 
>> écrit :
>>
>>     To NCSG Policy Committee,
>>
>>     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,
>>     */https://docs.google.com/document/d/19AckdQ_GkPaqCkwcfWdnu8eSKK4YliRjYuP2iVBh4Vs/edit?usp=sharing
>>     /*
>>
>>     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.
>>
>>     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.
>>
>>     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/the same language /(not across
>>     languages).
>>
>>     */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,
>>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/19AckdQ_GkPaqCkwcfWdnu8eSKK4YliRjYuP2iVBh4Vs/edit?usp=sharing
>>     We will be debating this
>>     "compromise proposal" (that comes from ICANN Org) on Tuesday at
>>     the next Small Team Plus meeting.
>>     /*
>>
>>     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.
>>
>>     Please let me know your thoughts – soon –as the SubTeam meets
>>     again on Tuesday.
>>
>>     Best regards and tx,
>>
>>     Kathy
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     NCSG-PC mailing list
>>     NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>     https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20240528/6ffacee7/attachment.htm>