11,770
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 24:
Line 24: − After the long delay ruling from the [[String Similarity Panel]] was released in late February 2013, it was revealed that [[.hotels]] had been deemed to similar to [[.hoteis]] and consequently were placed in contention set. Only one TLD can go on from a contention set to implementation, the others must be withdrawn or beat in auction or otherwise negotiated away from their application. The process of the String Similarity Panel was long obscured and had been causing a great deal of confusion and anxiety within the new TLD applicant community. There is no official appeals process to the findings of the Panel.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-26feb13-en.htm Announcement 26Feb13, ICANN.org] Retrieved 27 Feb 2013</ref>+ + + + + + + + +
updating auction details
The warning states that the applicant is "seeking exclusive access to a common generic string .. that relates to a broad market sector," which Ms. Dryden notes could have unintended consequences and a negative impact on competition.<ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/Hotels-AU-75482.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1353451686000 Hotels AU, GACweb.ICANN.org]</ref>
The warning states that the applicant is "seeking exclusive access to a common generic string .. that relates to a broad market sector," which Ms. Dryden notes could have unintended consequences and a negative impact on competition.<ref>[https://gacweb.icann.org/download/attachments/22938690/Hotels-AU-75482.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1353451686000 Hotels AU, GACweb.ICANN.org]</ref>
==String Similarity==
==String Similarity==
In late February 2013, the [[String Similarity Panel]] (SSP) released a ruling, which revealed that '''.hotels''' and [[.hoteis]] had been deemed too similar and were placed in a contention set. Only one TLD can go on from a contention set to implementation, the others must be withdrawn or beat in auction or otherwise negotiated away from their application. The process of the String Similarity Panel was long obscured and had been causing a great deal of confusion and anxiety within the new TLD applicant community. Other than the .hotel/hoteis contention set there was only one other created, [[.unicom]] & [[.unicorn]]. There is no official appeals process to the findings of the Panel.<ref>[http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-26feb13-en.htm Announcement 26Feb13, ICANN.org] Retrieved 27 Feb 2013</ref>
===Appeal===
[[Booking.com]] filed an [[IRP]] on ICANN in late March 2014, appealing the decision of the [[String Similarity Panel|SSP]].<ref>[http://domainincite.com/16203-hotel-applicant-files-irp-on-icann Hotel Applicant Files IRP on ICANN]</ref> The appeal was not based a the merits of the SSP decision, but rather challenged that the ICANN Board of Directors acted outside of its bylaws by creating the arbitrary SSP system. In early March 2015 the IRP Panel ruled in favor of ICANN, but agreed that the SSP process is flawed and ordered ICANN to pay half of the panels cost.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/18097-icann-wins-hotels-hoteis-confusion-appeal-but-has-to-pay-up-anyway ICANN wins hotels/hoteis confusion]</ref>
==ICANN Auction==
The contention set including '''.hotels''' and [[.hoteis]] went to [[GTLD_Auctions#ICANN_Auctions|ICANN Auction]] on 18 November 2015. [[Booking.com]] won the auction with a winning bid of $2.2 million, earning them exclusive rights to the .hotels.<ref>[https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/auctionresults New gTLD Auction Results]</ref>
==Community Objection==
The Hotel Consumer Protection Coalition filed a community objection against the application, as did HOTREC (Hotels, Restaurants & Cafés in Europe).<ref>[http://www.iccwbo.org/products-and-services/arbitration-and-adr/expertise/icann-new-gtld-dispute-resolution/pending-cases/ Pending Cases, ICCWBO.org] Retrieved 14 May 2013</ref>
==References==
==References==
{{reflist}}
{{reflist}}