Recent Posts
- Verisign confirms first price increase under new .net contract
- EFF recommends against new gTLDs
- auDA chair quits days before vote to fire him
- Crocker: no date on next new gTLD round
- Donuts to complete Rightside acquisition tonight
- MMX says .vip renewals running at 75%
- auDA now looking to outsource .au registry
- .blog tops 100,000 names, 66,500 blogs
- Attendance dips for ICANN in Johannesburg
- Empowered Community makes first symbolic exercise of power
- CentralNic brings back old CFO
- Short .vegas domains go on sale
- GoDaddy flips hosting business for $456 million
- Domain growth slows a lot in Q1
- Governments slammed for overreach as Amazon wins gTLD appeal
- ICANN gives the nod to Donuts-Rightside merger
- Junk drop cuts .xyz in half, .top claims volume crown
- Over 750 domains hijacked in attack on Gandi
- ICANN chair paid $114,000 last year
- Could the next new gTLD round last 25 years? Or 70 years?
- auDA explains secretive new regime in bid to save chair
- Second-level .ke domains go on sale this month
- Billionaire Elon Musk reacquired x.com
- Domainers want the head of auDA’s chair
- ICANN expects to lose 750 registrars in the next year
- .blog renewal prices will not go up, registry promises
- ICANN shuffles regional bosses, drops “hub” concept
- .net price increases approved
- India to have SIXTEEN ccTLDs
- ICANN heading to Japan and Canada in 2019
- Uniregistry sale leads to BBC telling millions that domainers exist
- Cybersquatting cases down in .uk
- As .boots self-terminates, ICANN will not redelegate it
- GoDaddy launches security service after Sucuri acquisition
- Zero registrars pass ICANN audit
- Zone file access is crap, security panel confirms
- Ombudsman steps in after harassment claims in Whois group
- US “threatens” Costa Rica over Pirate Bay domains
- Forget emojis, you can buy Egyptian hieroglyph .com domains
- Donuts to pay $213 million for Rightside
- Bladel quits as Council chair as GoDaddy ruled “ineligible” for election
- Should ICANN get breastfeeding areas? Have your say!
- Domain President? Dicker fallout continues as Schwartz unleashes tweetstorm
- InternetNZ wants to fire two of its three (!) CEOs
- CIRA and Nominum offering DNS firewall
- DENIC gets approved for registry escrow
- ICANN scraps remote meeting hubs
- MMX says .vip renewals to be at 70%+
- About that $3,800 emoji domain sale…
- ICANN finds no conflict of interest in .sport decision
PIR goes live with three non-Latin .org gTLDs
The internet has its first IDN versions of legacy gTLDs.
Public Interest Registry had three new gTLDs delegated over the weekend, all non-Latin versions of its flagship .org.
The gTLDs were .संगठन, which means “organization” in Hindi, and the Chinese .机构 and .组织机构, which seem to be two ways of saying “organization” too.
They’re not strictly speaking transliterations, as they represent whole dictionary words conceptually related to .org, rather than trying to approximate the spoken sound of “org”.
The .com equivalents Verisign has applied for in other scripts are actually meant to sound the same as “com” without actually meaning “commercial” or “company” in their language.
Because PIR has taken a different approach, there’s no grandfathering for existing .org registrants.
These three new gTLDs will be unrestricted, according to PIR’s applications, but will have slightly stricter rules on abuse — no porn will be allowed, for example.
“Because PIR has taken a different approach, there’s no grandfathering for existing .org registrants.”
Is there a source for this bit of info ?
Thx
There’s no mention of grandfathering in the applications.
There wasn’t in VRSN’s either. 😉
Hindi has never been allowed in 2nd level .org, thus there is nothing to grandfather for संगठन.
For the Chinese TLDs however, PIR should publicly comment on the question.
Errr. The Verisign application DO mention existing registrants.
They’re not the first, .OPR (xn--c1avg) beat them by 4 days.
And to be REALLY pedantic, I don’t think you can call them “IDN versions of Legacy TLD’s” if the IDN registrants in .org are being chucked under a bus by PIR.
Legacy implies inheritance. PIR’s existing registrant base didn’t inherit anything, other than a good rogering.
You’re right about .OPR. My software caught it when it was delegated but my brain didn’t.
No comment on your second point.
According to my information the upcoming launches from PIR are .орг, .机构, .संगठन – the Cyrillic, Chinese 2-character, and Hindi versions of .org. But I have not found any info on a TLD .组织机构. I am only a beginner in Chinese and also struggling but it seems you got mixed up with the Chinese 4-character version of .org which is 机构体制 and which to my info has not been announced yet. Hope this helps.
Hi Lutz,
Both .机构 (xn--nqv7f) and .组织机构 (xn--nqv7fs00ema) were delegated on 20140309
My Chinese is non-existent, but I’m referring to this:
https://gtldresult.icann.org/application-result/applicationstatus/applicationdetails/1762
The Chinese string there is 组织机构, which is what I used in this post. I’ve searched ICANN’s web site for 机构体制 and couldn’t find any applications.
Have I misunderstood what you’re saying?
Hi Drewbert, hi Kevin,
I know that both Chinese strings from PIR were delegated. But in the communication to the registrars PIR only announced the upcoming launch for the two character string in Chinese (plus the Cyrillic and Hindi version) with a probable sunrise (unconfirmed) in the coming weeks. PIR did not mention an upcoming launch of the 4-character string in Chinese even though it was delegated. I should have been clearer in my language.
And, Kevin, indeed your 4 characters in Chinese were definitely the right ones. Sorry for the confusion. Like I said – I am only a beginner in Chinese.
I am not a language expert but it is possible org in Cyrillic is both a translation and transliteration.
.org – Organization
.орг – Организация (Organization)
RegistrantA now owns Россия.org and RegistrantB will own Россия.орг
Both sound identical.
I thought ICANN did not permit aural confusion.
agb 2.2.1.1.3:
“Such category of objection is not limited to
visual similarity. Rather, confusion based on any type of
similarity (including visual, aural, or similarity of meaning)”
Only PIR itself had standing to file string confusion objection. That was one of the AGB design flaws: registrants, perhaps thru the Independent Objector or ALAC, should have standing if the same registry is proposing a confusingly similar TLD.