Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.

ICANN Resolutions » Consideration of Re-evaluation of the Vistaprint Limited String Confusion Objection Expert Determination

Important note: The Board Resolutions are as reported in the Board Meeting Transcripts, Minutes & Resolutions portion of ICANN's website. Only the words contained in the Resolutions themselves represent the official acts of the Board. The explanatory text provided through this database (including the summary, implementation actions, identification of related resolutions, and additional information) is an interpretation or an explanation that has no official authority and does not represent the purpose behind the Board actions, nor does any explanations or interpretations modify or override the Resolutions themselves. Resolutions can only be modified through further act of the ICANN Board.

Consideration of Re-evaluation of the Vistaprint Limited String Confusion Objection Expert Determination


Resolution of the ICANN Board
Meeting Date: 
Wed, 2 Dec 2015
Resolution Number: 
2015.12.02.07
Resolution Text: 

Whereas, on 9 October 2015, an Independent Review Process (IRP) Panel (Panel) issued its Final Declaration in the IRP filed by Vistaprint Limited (Vistaprint) against ICANN (Final Declaration). Vistaprint specifically challenged the String Confusion Objection Expert Determination (Expert Determination) finding Vistaprint's applications for .WEBS to be confusingly similar to Web.com's application for .WEB (Vistaprint SCO).

Whereas, while the IRP Panel found that ICANN did not discriminate against Vistaprint in not directing a re-evaluation of the Expert Determination, the Panel recommended that the Board exercise its judgment on the question of whether an additional review is appropriate to re-evaluate the Expert Determination. (See id. at ¶ 196.)

Resolved (2015.12.02.05), the Board defers to a subsequent meeting its consideration of the Panel recommendation in the Final Declaration that the Board exercise its judgment on the question of whether an additional review is appropriate to re-evaluate the Expert Determination.

Rationale for Resolution: 

N/A (see above)