A Verisign spokesperson participated in a Q&A with IDNBlog to address a few burning questions regarding Verisign’s recent gTLD applications. While we understand the confidential nature of Verisign’s future plans, below please find questions and answers on four key new gTLD topics.
Q: It surprised some that Verisign applied for קוֹם. (punycode: xn--hdb9cza1b) but not קום. (punycode: xn--9dbq2a). As קום and קוֹם are variants will Verisign eventually obtain the right to use both?
A: We are currently in discussions with ICANN on how to handle the administrative error that resulted in the inclusion of a variant character in the VeriSign Sàrl application in our Hebrew IDN transliteration of .com.
Q: If Verisign obtains the transliterations of .COM that it applied for, how will they be handled? Would priority be given to current IDN.com owners to unlock IDN.com-in-IDN as was previously reported?
A: It would be premature to discuss our plans surrounding the new gTLDs and IDNs we applied for. We will discuss future plans for the TLDs once applications are approved.
Q: How did Verisign decide what language .NET transliterations to apply for?
A: Through extensive research Verisign identified and then applied for those .net transliterated strings which make the most sense to end users in scripts where demand for internationalized domains are high.
Q: Will Verisign consider contesting CINIC’s application for 公司 (“Company” in Chinese) given the similarity to .COM?
A: While it’s premature to discuss any specific plans to challenge applications submitted, we are evaluating the list of new gTLD applications as published by ICANN to determine whether or not they raise any concerns. Verisign is committed to ensuring that the .com and .net experience for users remains coherent and uniform, regardless of script, language, or location on the planet.
Jun 21, 2012 2 Comments