Skip to main content
Resources

Two-Character Letter/Letter Label Comments and Mitigation Measures

As of 13 December 2016, this page is no longer active. Please visit here for more information.

For comments submitted before 6 October 2015, view the archive of comments received.

TLD  Two
Characters
 
Comments from GovernmentLast
updated
 
RO Mitigation PlanRO NameBRAND TLD
stadasuView Comments
2016-03-22
2016-08-15Yes
statefarmsuView Comments
2016-03-22
2016-08-15Yes
toraysuView Comments
2016-03-22
2016-08-15Yes
webersuView Comments
2016-03-22
2016-08-15Yes
williamhillsuView Comments
2016-03-22
2016-08-15Yes
wolterskluwersuView Comments
2016-03-22
2016-08-15View Mitigation

wolterskluwer Mitigation

By Wolters Kluwer N.V.

Proposed Measure to Avoid Confusion—Brand TLD (Specification 13)

Provide a brief explanation of the TLD:

.WOLTERSKLUWER TLD is a closed Brand new gTLD operated by Wolters Kluwer N.V.

Protections:

Wolters Kluwer N.V. for the .WOLTERSKLUWER TLD has executed Specification 13 to the Registry Agreement. Specification 13 already contractually requires that Wolters Kluwer N.V. will apply measures which, by their very nature, avoid confusion with the corresponding country code, namely the following:

1. .WOLTERSKLUWER is identical to a qualifying registered trademark;
2. .WOLTERSKLUWER is not a Generic String, as this is defined in Specification 11;
3. .WOLTERSKLUWER TLD has developed and will implement a closed registration policy for .WOLTERSKLUWER that requires that all domain names in the .WOLTERSKLUWER TLD be registered ONLY by Registry Operator, its Affiliates, and its Trademark Licensees;
4. As required under the Registry Agreement, the .WOLTERSKLUWER TLD will clearly publish this registration policy;
5. .WOLTERSKLUWER TLD will conduct internal reviews at least once per calendar year to ensure continued compliance with Specification 13.

Compliance with Specification 13 prohibits the .WOLTERSKLUWER TLD from registering domain names to unaffiliated third parties and thus clearly designate to the public that .WOLTERSKLUWER TLD is a proprietary space in which all second-level domains in the TLD are being operated by Wolters Kluwer N.V., its Affiliates and Trademark Licensees and not the government or the corresponding country code operator. By this Wolters Kluwer N.V. confirms that all registrations of two letter domain names shall comply with the requirements of Specification 13.


2016-04-05

Wolters Kluwer N.V.Yes
camsuView Comments
2016-08-15
2016-08-15No
doctorsuView Comments
2016-08-15
2016-08-15No
fujixeroxsuView Comments
2016-08-15
2016-08-15Yes
gamessuView Comments
2016-08-15
2016-08-15No
gdnsuView Comments
2016-08-15
2016-08-15No
ikanosuView Comments
2016-08-15
2016-08-15Yes
jcpsuView Comments
2016-08-15
2016-08-15Yes
quebecsuView Comments
2016-08-15
2016-08-15No
totalsuView Comments
2016-08-15
2016-08-15Yes
wtcsuView Comments
2016-08-15
2016-08-15Yes
ablevnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
boovnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
bostikvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
calvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
camvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
cbsvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
channelvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
chintaivnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
dadvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
dayvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
dclkvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
devvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
doctorvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
eatvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
ecovnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
esqvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
flyvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
fujixeroxvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
gamesvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
gbizvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
gdnvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
glevnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
gugevnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
hangoutvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
ikanovnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
jcpvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
mapvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
memevnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
movvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
newvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
phdvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
prodvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
profvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
quebecvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
rsvpvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
searchvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
sfrvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
showtimevnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
totalvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
watchesvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
wtcvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
xn--flw351evnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
xn--kpu716fvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
xn--pbt977cvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
xn--qcka1pmcvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
zipvnView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
ablemxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
boomxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
bostikmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
calmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
cammxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
cbsmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
channelmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
chintaimxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
dadmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
daymxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
dclkmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
devmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
doctormxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
eatmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
ecomxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
esqmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
flymxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
fujixeroxmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
gamesmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
gbizmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
gdnmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
glemxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
gugemxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
hangoutmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
ikanomxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
jcpmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
mapmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
mememxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
movmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
newmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
phdmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
prodmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
profmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
quebecmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
rsvpmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
searchmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17No
sfrmxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes
showtimemxView Comments
2016-08-17
2016-08-17Yes

su Comments

By Yulia Elanskaya, Deputy Director of International Cooperation Department, Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation

Russia objects the release of Two-Character combination “.su” at the second level under any kind/all gTLD.
We are concerned that the deceptive similarity of these two-letter combinations with the country code ccTLD creates the risk of confusion and misleading of Internet users.
This requirement should apply to all current and future requests. However, we are prepared to discuss potential mitigation measures to avoid confusion and/or any unintended consequences with the corresponding country code if any to be proposed.

su Comments

By Yulia Elanskaya, Deputy Director of International Cooperation Department, Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation

With regards to public consultation process to the draft criteria proposed by ICANN’s GDD Russia would like to use the opportunity to address our concerns about confusion with two-letter country/territory codes at the second level under New gTLDs.
First of all, we also have the same problem as some governments and had already pointed out that it may create confusion with particular ccTLDs and the risk of misleading of Internet users.
In order to avoid any unintended consequences in future, Russia would like to reiterates our request towards ICANN to put on hold any existing requests and not to proceed with releasing Russian country codes and names at the second level under all New gTLDs.
Secondly, we in general agree that there would be useful to establish a list of clear measures that a gTLD registry must implement in order to release from reservation currently reserved two-letter second-level domains and we are prepared to discuss potential mitigation measures to avoid confusion and/or any unintended consequences with the corresponding country code. However, we oppose to allow currently reserved two-letter second-level domains to be released for all gTLD registries at this particular stage.
Further study in all aspects on the advantages and disadvantages respectively is required. We believe that the proposed measures are not quite effective and adequate in addressing the issue of confusion with two-letter country/territory codes at the second level since do not consider the whole picture with corresponding risks and all possible concerns.
Last but not least, we cannot recognize that the proposed measures are consistent with appropriate GAC advice and proposed measures and the actions recommended by the GAC at its Helsinki Communiqué (30th June, 2016).

vn Comments

By Le Thi Ngoc Mo, Deputy Director General of Vietnam Telecommunications Authority (VNTA), Ministry of Information and Communication (MIC)

Dear ICANN,

In response to ICANN’s proposal of measures for Letter/Letter Two-Character ASCII Labels to Avoid Confusion with Corresponding Country Codes, we do not agree with the Exclusive Availability Pre-Registration Period as a measure to avoid confusion. The proposed measure is not clear that whether names would be made available to governments at a fee or no charge. In case governments have to pay fees for the protection of their names, it is not resonable and it is impossible to developing countries.

We would like to ask ICANN to keep the reservation of the two character label strings specified in the ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 standard. Those strings are released only if the Registry Operator reaches a formal agreement with the related government or country-code manager. Moreover, we believe that every mitigation plan proposed to avoid confusion with the corresponding country code should be subjected to the approval by ICANN only after being approved by the respective government/ccTLD manager.


Best Regards,
Le Thi Ngoc Mo (Ms)
Deputy Director General,
Viet Nam Telecommunications Authority (VNTA)
Ministry of Information Communications (MIC), Viet Nam.

mx Comments

By Miguel Ángel Muñoz Petrichole, Deputy Director of International Affairs Telecommunications, Secretariat of Communications and Transport

Comments of the Mexican Administrations to the document “Proposed Measures for Letter/Letter Two-Character ASCII Labels to Avoid Confusion with Corresponding Country Codes.”

Mexico considers that the proposed measures are not enough to avoid confusion with corresponding country codes. In contrast, we believe that the release of country codes in the Second Level Domain (SLD) could destabilize the domain name system.

Regarding the proposed measures, Mexico considers the following:

• To maintain the exclusivity of a country code for a 30-day period in favor of the related government does not necessarily contributes to consumer choice or competitiveness. Besides, it could produce additional costs to governments or country code managers who wish to obtain a country code under a new gTLD.
• Likewise, it will require additional efforts and resources to review each new policy that every new gTLD operator publishes.

Mexico considers that the protection of the country codes in the ISO-3166 list should not be released. Having the offer to register a country code as a SLD would foster combinations of domain name registrations in the third level of new gTLDs. This does not contribute to the objective of this round for new gTLDs, in which it sought to increase the available options only at the root level, taking into account that other options of registration already were available and covered by other top level domains (TLDs).

It is worth noting that the initial conception of the DNS, sought to foster the registration of new domain names with a specific orientation of diverse nature: some community-territorial, some other with technical or network orientation, military, commercial, among others*, and the new gTLDs were equally conceived in this sense.

Based on the principle of parsimony, which implicates that entities should not multiple needlessly and should use the available resources; given the existence of ccTLD, which purpose is the identification of a country or community, there would be no need to have it in the SLD under new gTLDs.

*See Postel, J. (1994). RFC1591, available on: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1591.txt , among other reference documents.

Domain Name System
Internationalized Domain Name ,IDN,"IDNs are domain names that include characters used in the local representation of languages that are not written with the twenty-six letters of the basic Latin alphabet ""a-z"". An IDN can contain Latin letters with diacritical marks, as required by many European languages, or may consist of characters from non-Latin scripts such as Arabic or Chinese. Many languages also use other types of digits than the European ""0-9"". The basic Latin alphabet together with the European-Arabic digits are, for the purpose of domain names, termed ""ASCII characters"" (ASCII = American Standard Code for Information Interchange). These are also included in the broader range of ""Unicode characters"" that provides the basis for IDNs. The ""hostname rule"" requires that all domain names of the type under consideration here are stored in the DNS using only the ASCII characters listed above, with the one further addition of the hyphen ""-"". The Unicode form of an IDN therefore requires special encoding before it is entered into the DNS. The following terminology is used when distinguishing between these forms: A domain name consists of a series of ""labels"" (separated by ""dots""). The ASCII form of an IDN label is termed an ""A-label"". All operations defined in the DNS protocol use A-labels exclusively. The Unicode form, which a user expects to be displayed, is termed a ""U-label"". The difference may be illustrated with the Hindi word for ""test"" — परीका — appearing here as a U-label would (in the Devanagari script). A special form of ""ASCII compatible encoding"" (abbreviated ACE) is applied to this to produce the corresponding A-label: xn--11b5bs1di. A domain name that only includes ASCII letters, digits, and hyphens is termed an ""LDH label"". Although the definitions of A-labels and LDH-labels overlap, a name consisting exclusively of LDH labels, such as""icann.org"" is not an IDN."