Recent Posts
- Claims UDRP has cost over $360 million so far
- Ironic eight-figure deal marks more Euro-registrar consolidation
- Court rules generic dictionary domains CAN be trademarked
- ICANN director Burr leaving Neustar
- Right of the colon? IDN getting killed over dot confusion
- Despite Afilias lawsuit, Neustar names date for Indian takeaway
- Endurance domain revenue dips
- After ICANN knockback, Amazon countries agree to .amazon talks
- Operation September Thrust leads to another million-domain Radix gTLD
- Brexit blamed as .eu hits six-year low
- CentralNic expects flat profit as revenue almost doubles
- XYZ reveals .monster gTLD launch dates
- Huge batch of Afilias TLDs approved in China
- .SE sells off $3.2 million registrar biz
- ICANN picks Seattle for public meeting
- ICANN approves two new TLDs, including THAT one
- MMX sees better profits than expected
- Pay up or sell up, ICANN tells failing new gTLD
- Brexit boost for Irish domains
- Brexit won’t just affect Brits, .eu registry says
- New domain price guessing game warns against “asshole domain squatters”
- Nazis rejoice! A TLD for you could be coming soon
- ICANN creates female-heavy anti-harassment team
- ICANN chief gets $100k bonus
- ICANN puts deadline on .amazon talks
- Crunch Whois privacy talks kick off
- Another failing gTLD not paying its “onerous” dues
- .CLUB announces three years of price increases
- How new gTLD auctions could kill gaming for good
- .amazon domain isn’t a slam dunk after all
- Chile opens .cl to all ICANN registrars
- “Please send women!” ICANN board urges
- NamesCon names con speakers
- Dark horse NameSilo doubles size in 2018
- UK tells .eu registrants to lawyer up as no-deal Brexit looms
- Radix now has China approval for whole TLD stable
- The most-read stories of 2018
- Another bundle of joy for XYZ as Johnson & Johnson throws out the .baby
- Now even parked domains will have GDPR notices
- ICANN budget predicts small new gTLD recovery and slowing legacy growth
- Verisign says Afilias tried to “rig” $135 million .web auction
- Exclusive gang of 10 to work on making ICANN the Whois gatekeeper
- Governments blast ICANN over Amazon gTLDs
- No more free transfers in Denmark
- ICANN outs two more deadbeat new gTLDs
- .eu domains to be sold to non-residents
- DNS inventor says .luxe first innovation in a decade
- New gTLDs continue growth trend, but can it last?
- No .web until 2021 after Afilias files ICANN appeal
- Nevett lands at PIR
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.