Recent Posts
- US not happy with Donuts hiring Atallah
- ICANN denies it’s in bed with trademark lawyers
- ICANN 63, Day 0 — registrars bollock DI as Whois debate kicks off
- Registrars still not responding to private Whois requests
- Book review — “Domain Names: Strategies and Legal Aspects”
- Co-founder Nevett leaves Donuts
- The internet is still working after KSK roll
- Donuts loses to ICANN in $135 million .web auction appeal
- ICANN says it can spend quarter-billion-dollar auction fund however it likes
- Google abandons its .kid gTLD bid
- ICANN number two Atallah is new CEO of Donuts
- ICANN blocks .islam after government veto
- Nominet to donate over $260,000 to Children In Need
- CentralNic buys .fans for peanuts
- Is auDA’s new marketing windfall working?
- Google adds censorship workaround to Android devices
- Spammy .loan makes Alibaba fastest-growing and fastest-shrinking registrar in June
- Here’s what ICANN’s boss is saying about Whois access now
- Parsons quits GoDaddy board
- Brazil dancing around four million reg milestone
- Donuts says DPML now covers “millions” of trademark variants as price rockets again
- Chinese registrars on the decline
- $3.2 million-a-year registrar up for grabs
- It’s Drazek vs Dammak for GNSO Council chair
- Cloudflare selling all domains at cost: “All we’re doing is pinging an API”
- MMX waving goodbye to .london? Boss puts focus on renewal profits, China
- Emoji domains now easier to use
- Chutzpah alert! DotKids wants ICANN handout to fight gTLD auction
- Afilias gets Guinness record for .au migration
- KSK vote was NOT unanimous
- ICANN turns 20 today (or maybe not)
- Van der Laan to leave ICANN board
- Set buttocks to clench! ICANN approves risky KSK rollover
- Mediators hired as Whois reformers butt heads
- US scraps fucking stupid “seven dirty words” ban
- Beginning of the end for DomainTools? Court orders it to scrub Whois records
- PIR chief: registries should stop stressing about volume
- .CLUB sees spam double after China promotion
- Com Laude acquires Scottish rival
- CentralNic acquired yet another company
- Empty Whois a threat to the US elections?
- Donuts gets bought by former ICANN CEO’s firm
- .tel’s second-biggest registrar gets canned
- Whois privacy did NOT increase spam volumes
- Afilias finally admits it’s American
- Could a new US law make GDPR irrelevant?
- No more free ride for ICANN Fellows?
- Afilias sues India to block $12 million Neustar back-end deal
- More consolidation? Endurance said to be up for sale
- ICANN faces critical choice as security experts warn against key rollover
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.