.pet: Difference between revisions
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
==String Confusion Objection== | ==String Confusion Objection== | ||
[[Google]] submitted a String Confusion Objection to the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) (a division of the [[AAA]]) on March 13, 2013, asserting that '''.pet''' and [[.pets]] are confusingly similar.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/docs/petsvpet.pdf <.pets> v <.pet>, Domain Incite.] Retrieved 20 August 2013</ref> [[.pets]]' only applicant is [[Donuts]], but a ruling by [[Richard Page]] of the [[ICDR]] that agrees with objection may put [[Donuts]] into the same contention set with current '''.pet''' applicants [[Google]] and [[Afilias]]. This ruling came as a surprise as similar String Confusion Objections for [[.hotel]] vs. [[.hotels]] and [[.car]] vs. [[.cars]] did not find the plural form of the strings to be confusingly similar.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/14224-google-beats-donuts-in-objection-pet-and-pets-are-confusingly-similar Google beats Donuts in Objection, Domain Incite.] Retrieved 20 August 2013</ref> A second panelist agreed with [[Google]]'s objection in a report published on September 19, 2013<ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/2013/09/19/donuts-objection-pets-domain-name/ Pets Domain Name Objection, Domain Wire] Retrieved 19 Sept 2013</ref> | [[Google]] submitted a String Confusion Objection to the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) (a division of the [[AAA]]) on March 13, 2013, asserting that '''.pet''' and [[.pets]] are confusingly similar.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/docs/petsvpet.pdf <.pets> v <.pet>, Domain Incite.] Retrieved 20 August 2013</ref> [[.pets]]' only applicant is [[Donuts]], but a ruling by [[Richard Page]] of the [[ICDR]] that agrees with objection may put [[Donuts]] into the same contention set with current '''.pet''' applicants [[Google]] and [[Afilias]]. This ruling came as a surprise as similar String Confusion Objections for [[.hotel]] vs. [[.hotels]] and [[.car]] vs. [[.cars]] did not find the plural form of the strings to be confusingly similar.<ref>[http://domainincite.com/14224-google-beats-donuts-in-objection-pet-and-pets-are-confusingly-similar Google beats Donuts in Objection, Domain Incite.] Retrieved 20 August 2013</ref> A second panelist agreed with [[Google]]'s objection in a report published on September 19, 2013<ref>[http://domainnamewire.com/2013/09/19/donuts-objection-pets-domain-name/ Pets Domain Name Objection, Domain Wire] Retrieved 19 Sept 2013</ref>. | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 19:48, 19 September 2013
| Status: | Proposed |
| country: | International |
| Type: | Generic |
| Category: | Lifestyle |
| Priority #: | 1229 - Google (Charleston Road Registry Inc.) 1529 - Afilias |
More information: 
| |
.pet is a proposed TLD in ICANN's New gTLD Program.
Applicants
String Confusion Objection
Google submitted a String Confusion Objection to the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) (a division of the AAA) on March 13, 2013, asserting that .pet and .pets are confusingly similar.[2] .pets' only applicant is Donuts, but a ruling by Richard Page of the ICDR that agrees with objection may put Donuts into the same contention set with current .pet applicants Google and Afilias. This ruling came as a surprise as similar String Confusion Objections for .hotel vs. .hotels and .car vs. .cars did not find the plural form of the strings to be confusingly similar.[3] A second panelist agreed with Google's objection in a report published on September 19, 2013[4].
References
- ↑ Pet Status, ICANN.org
- ↑ <.pets> v <.pet>, Domain Incite. Retrieved 20 August 2013
- ↑ Google beats Donuts in Objection, Domain Incite. Retrieved 20 August 2013
- ↑ Pets Domain Name Objection, Domain Wire Retrieved 19 Sept 2013