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As of 13 December 2016, this page is no longer active.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 Government | Last updated | RO Mitigation Plan | RO Name | BRAND TLD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| app | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| axa | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| beauty | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| bestbuy | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| contact | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| dhl | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| epost | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| extraspace | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| farmers | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| feedback | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| ford | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| forum | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| godaddy | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| group | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | View Mitigation View Documents 2016-04-25 | Donuts Inc. | No |
| hair | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| lexus | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| lincoln | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| lipsy | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| locus | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| ltd | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | View Mitigation View Documents 2016-04-25 | Donuts Inc. | No |
| lundbeck | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| makeup | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| man | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | View Mitigationman MitigationBy MAN SE .man is a closed Brand TLD for the sole and exclusive use of MAN SE. 2016-04-21 | MAN SE | Yes |
| mcd | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| mcdonalds | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| med | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| men | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | View Mitigationmen MitigationBy Famous Four Media Limited By Famous Four media Limited. 2016-04-25 | Famous Four Media Limited | No |
| nadex | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| next | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| nextdirect | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| nissay | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| office | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| pid | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| playstation | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| promo | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| racing | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | View Mitigationracing MitigationBy Famous Four Media Limited By Famous Four media Limited. 2016-04-25 | Famous Four Media Limited | No |
| realtor | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| realty | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| rio | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| salon | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | View Mitigation View Documents 2016-04-25 | Donuts Inc. | No |
| schaeffler | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| sharp | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| skin | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| stada | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| statefarm | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| storage | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | No | ||
| stream | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | View Mitigationstream MitigationBy Famous Four Media Limited By Famous Four media Limited. 2016-06-20 | Famous Four Media Limited | No |
| tdk | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| tiffany | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| toyota | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| williamhill | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| xn--estv75g | sn | View Comments 2016-04-29 | 2016-04-29 | Yes | ||
| amica | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| app | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | No | ||
| axa | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| bms | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | View Mitigationbms MitigationBy Bristol Myers Squibb Proposed Measure to Avoid Confusion—Brand TLD (Specification 13) 2016-04-20 | Bristol Myers Squibb | Yes |
| emerson | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| extraspace | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| farmers | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| free | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | No | ||
| gmbh | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | View Mitigation View Documents 2016-04-25 | Donuts Inc. | No |
| group | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | View Mitigation View Documents 2016-04-25 | Donuts Inc. | No |
| insurance | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | View Mitigationinsurance MitigationBy fTLD Registry Services, LLC Please see the attached file that details fTLD Registry Services' implementation plan for .BANK and .INSURANCE to avoid confusion with corresponding country codes. View Documents 2016-04-20 | fTLD Registry Services, LLC | No |
| lidl | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | No | ||
| locus | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| ltd | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | View Mitigation View Documents 2016-04-25 | Donuts Inc. | No |
| lupin | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| mcd | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| mcdonalds | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| men | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | View Mitigationmen MitigationBy Famous Four Media Limited By Famous Four media Limited. 2016-04-25 | Famous Four Media Limited | No |
| promo | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | No | ||
| racing | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | View Mitigationracing MitigationBy Famous Four Media Limited By Famous Four media Limited. 2016-04-25 | Famous Four Media Limited | No |
| realtor | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | No | ||
| salon | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | View Mitigation View Documents 2016-04-25 | Donuts Inc. | No |
| schwarz | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | No | ||
| stada | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| statefarm | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| toray | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| weber | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| williamhill | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | Yes | ||
| wolterskluwer | sg | View Comments 2016-03-21 | 2016-03-21 | View Mitigationwolterskluwer MitigationBy Wolters Kluwer N.V. Proposed Measure to Avoid Confusion—Brand TLD (Specification 13) 2016-04-05 | Wolters Kluwer N.V. | Yes |
| bms | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | View Mitigationbms MitigationBy Bristol Myers Squibb Proposed Measure to Avoid Confusion—Brand TLD (Specification 13) 2016-04-20 | Bristol Myers Squibb | Yes |
| free | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | No | ||
| insurance | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | View Mitigationinsurance MitigationBy fTLD Registry Services, LLC Please see the attached file that details fTLD Registry Services' implementation plan for .BANK and .INSURANCE to avoid confusion with corresponding country codes. View Documents 2016-04-20 | fTLD Registry Services, LLC | No |
| juniper | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | Yes | ||
| latrobe | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | View Mitigationlatrobe MitigationBy Latrobe University Proposed Measure to Avoid Confusion—Brand TLD (Specification 13) 2016-04-26 | Latrobe University | Yes |
| lefrak | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | View Mitigationlefrak MitigationBy LeFrak Organization, Inc. Provide a brief explanation of the TLD: [Registry Operator] has applied for .[TLD] to run a closed .brand environment. 2016-04-19 | LeFrak Organization, Inc. | Yes |
| lupin | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | Yes | ||
| mattel | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | View Mitigationmattel MitigationBy Mattel Sites, Inc. .MATTEL gTLD Confusion Avoidance Plan View Documents 2016-04-19 | Mattel Sites, Inc. | Yes |
| nationwide | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | Yes | ||
| onyourside | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | Yes | ||
| rexroth | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | View Mitigationrexroth MitigationBy Robert Bosch GMBH Provide a brief explanation of the TLD: 2016-04-25 | Robert Bosch GMBH | Yes |
| shangrila | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | Yes | ||
| wolterskluwer | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | View Mitigationwolterskluwer MitigationBy Wolters Kluwer N.V. Proposed Measure to Avoid Confusion—Brand TLD (Specification 13) 2016-04-05 | Wolters Kluwer N.V. | Yes |
| xn--5su34j936bgsg | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | Yes | ||
| bms | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | View Mitigationbms MitigationBy Bristol Myers Squibb Proposed Measure to Avoid Confusion—Brand TLD (Specification 13) 2016-04-20 | Bristol Myers Squibb | Yes |
| free | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | No | ||
| insurance | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | View Mitigationinsurance MitigationBy fTLD Registry Services, LLC Please see the attached file that details fTLD Registry Services' implementation plan for .BANK and .INSURANCE to avoid confusion with corresponding country codes. View Documents 2016-04-20 | fTLD Registry Services, LLC | No |
| juniper | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | Yes | ||
| latrobe | ln | View Comments 2016-02-02 | 2016-02-22 | View Mitigationlatrobe MitigationBy Latrobe University Proposed Measure to Avoid Confusion—Brand TLD (Specification 13) 2016-04-26 | Latrobe University | Yes |
sn Comments
By Alex Corenthin, Administrateur, NIC senegal, .sn registry
Senegal is not favouring the release of Two-Character ASCII labels ""sn"" deceptively similar as the ccTLD "".sn"" at the second level. ICANN is requested to notice than SEnegal's objection on release of Two-character ASCII labels ""sn"" at the second level should apply to all current and future requests from new gTLD's" to avoid any confusion with the geographic domain name .SN.
sg Comments
By Queh Ser Pheng, Deputy Director, Internet Resource Management, Policy & Competition Development Group, Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore
We hereby respectfully submit our comment regarding the release of letter/letter two-character labels as second level domains.
At this stage, we are unable to agree to the release of the two-character "sg" label at the second-level under gTLDs because of the concern that such use would create public confusion with the ccTLD "sg" representing Singapore. Until further notice, this policy is to be applied to all gTLDs who have requested or will be requesting for the release of letter-letter two-character labels at the second level.
To elaborate further, we are open to considering the release of "sg" to registry operators who have robust framework in place to address concerns of government. We recognise there are legitimate and valid reasons for such use. However, we are of the view that it is prudent for ICANN to first put in place a holistic and robust framework before approvals can be given. More thoughts need to be given to the evaluation process and in particular the remedies available should a registry operator use the approved names in an undesirable manner. Besides possible public confusion with the corresponding country code and/or country/territory name, we are also concerned with:
(a) The possible reputational harm if ".sg.
(b) The direct harm if ".sg.
ICANN's current policy focuses only on the "initial release" process. There needs to be considerations given to "post-release" issues. As such, the ICANN framework should include:
(a) A recourse for the government/country code manager to issue a notice to object to the content and/or manner-of-use that is misleading, questionable, objectionable or contrary to the country’s reputation and laws. There should be an effective and robust process acceptable by the government/country code manager for the registry operator to address the concern; and
(b) Provisions to require the registry operator to re-seek approval from government/country code manager should there be material changes in ownership or organisational control (for example merger with or acquisitions by another entity).
In addition, ICANN must be committed to take actions against the registry operator should they fail to comply with the framework (e.g. implement a process for country/territory to raise objections to ICANN and for ICANN to take appropriate remedial actions such as remove/delete/revoke affected names).
in Comments
By Rahul Gosain, Director, Department of Electronics and Information Technology, Ministry of communication and Information Technology
“India restates its position of not favouring the release of Two-Character ASCII Labels “in”, “ln” , “1n” and deceptively similar as the ccTLD “.in” at the second level. ICANN is requested that India’s objection on release of Two-Character ASCII Labels “in”, “ln” and “1n” at the second level should apply to all current and future requests from new gTLDs.”
in Comments
By Rahul Gosain, Director, Department of Electronics and Information Technology, Ministry of communication and Information Technology
“India restates its position of not favouring the release of Two-Character ASCII Labels “in”, “ln” , “1n” and deceptively similar as the ccTLD “.in” at the second level. ICANN is requested that India’s objection on release of Two-Character ASCII Labels “in”, “ln” and “1n” at the second level should apply to all current and future requests from new gTLDs.”
