I need a crash course in confusing similarity.

I don’t know, folks. Maybe it’s time for me to pack it up and go home.

Why the frustration?

After reading hundreds of UDRP cases apparently I still can’t figure out what “confusingly similar” is.

Today’s case in point? WIPO panelist David Perkins has awarded the domain name WeWannaBuyYourCar.com to a company with trademarked logos for “We Buy Any Car.com”.

OK, so ‘we’, ‘buy’, and ‘car’ are similar. But I think ‘wanna’ and ‘your’ kind of throw this off. What if the domain in dispute was “webuycars.com”? Would that be confusingly similar?

Perkins agreed with the complainant’s assertion that the “…phonetic pronunciation of their marks and the disputed domain name is similar due to the beginning and ending of the WEBUYANYCAR trademarks and the disputed domain name being identical, namely “we” and “car”, and that is where the marks have the most impact on the consumer.”

Now there is certainly some similarity in the logos used by both the complainant and respondent. And apparently WeBuyAnyCar.com is extensively advertised in the UK where both parties are.

But this doesn’t seem like something UDRP was created to address. It may be a trademark dispute, but it’s certainly not a cybersquatting dispute.

by Kevin Murphy

ICANN continues to hide details of staff briefings to Board.

ICANN is continuing to redact large portions of its board briefing documents, despite the recommendations of its Accountability and Transparency Review team.

The organization has just published over 300 pages of documentation that was used to inform its board of directors before its meeting in Cartagena last month.

But large chunks of text have been whited out. Many of the redacted portions are also accompanied by a short explanation of why the text was redacted.

For example, the briefing papers suggest that ICANN planned to approve both its new top-level domains Applicant Guidebook and ICM Registry’s .xxx registry contract in Cartagena, but if you want to know what the proposed resolutions were, all you get is “Resolution Text Superceded” [sic] and a bunch of white space.

This seems to run contrary to the recommendations of the ATRT, which was set up in order to improve the transparency of ICANN’s decision-making.

The ATRT’s final report, published December 31, says (my emphasis):

“Commencing immediately, the Board should promptly publish all appropriate materials related to decision making processes – including preliminary announcements, briefing materials provided by staff and others, detailed Minutes, and where submitted, individual Directors’ statements relating to significant decisions. The redaction of materials should be kept to a minimum, limited to discussion of existing or threatened litigation, and staff issues such as appointments.”

It would be difficult to argue that the redacted text in this case relates to litigation or staff appointments.

The ATRT report also calls for ICANN to produce, before its San Francisco meeting in March, a policy statement outlining when it will redact information.

Judging by the latest set of published documents, it appears that this policy may be broader than the ATRT report envisioned.

Kevin Murphy is a freelance author covering domain names and writes DomainIncite.]

Biggest domain conference of the year starts next week.

DOMAINfest officially kicks off next Tuesday, February 1 in Santa Monica.

Organizers expect to meet or beat last year’s attendance of 650 people. So far attendees are from 28 countries. Registration is still open at a discount rate of $1,295 until Sunday. The conference has a record 37 sponsors (including BigJumbo, which I’ll be representing in addition to covering the event for Domain Name Wire).

The Fairmont Hotel is completely sold out to conference guests, but you can find reasonably priced rooms nearby.

You can also “dine with an expert” this year, but you better hurry to save a spot.

I think Go Daddy CEO Bob Parsons’ keynote will be a huge draw.

Feel free to leave a comment below if you’re going to the event to assist with pre-event networking. If you’re interested in meeting with me next week feel free to ping me at editor (at) domainnamewire.com and we’ll set something up.

Provide your input on the best domain name forums.

Are you one of the 1,000 people who have already taken the 6th Annual Domain Name Wire Survey?

That’s how many people have participated in the survey already, and one of the questions they’re answering is “which domain forum is best?”

Last year DNForum took home the most votes. The popular gathering spot for domainers has taken home the top prize 4 out of 5 years on the survey. NamePros came in second, and the private Domain Boardroom came in third.

If nothing changes in the waning weeks of the survey, you’ll see results for the domain forum question very similar to last year.

The last day to submit your survey is February 5.

Facebook still embroiled in fight over ‘FB’ mark with non-profit that sold it FB.com domain name.

So you bought a domain name from someone for $8 million plus and you still haven’t settled a trademark dispute with them? Makes no sense to me.

But on Monday Facebook filed an extension request with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to settle a trademark dispute with American Farm Bureau (AFB). The request said the parties are still engaged in settlement talks.

AFB filed a challenge against Facebook when the social network tried to trademark “FB”. During the discussions Facebook bought AFB’s FB.com domain name through an intermediary. Yet it still hadn’t settled the issue over the trademark. And now it’s asking for another 30 days to put the matter to rest.

I’m just amazed that you wouldn’t make a settlement part of the domain purchase.