[APAC-Discuss] about .jiankang (.健康) and the proposed objection from ALAC

[Rinalia Abdul Rahim]

Dear APRALO,



I would like to offer the following as food for thought for APRALO’s
deliberation on whether or not to support the community objection against
the new gTLD application for “.健康” by Stable Tone Limited and also to
respond to some of the questions raised by Edmon Chung, whose views I value
irrespective of the hat that he wears.  I also appreciated hearing
Richard’s views on the interpretation of “.健康”.



*Does the string “.**健康**” mean “.health” or “.healthy”?*

The answer is complicated because it can be both.  While健康 can be viewed in
broad terms to include health, healthy, wellbeing, wellness, etc., any
interpretation is limited to aspects of health.  What is important to bear
in mind is that the concept of healthy/wellbeing/wellness is firmly within
the realm of health and not separate to it. **



*WHO’s use of “**卫**生**” in its name to refer to health** *

The World Health Organization’s core priority when it was set up was on
prevention and control of diseases to protect the health of the public.   It
can be argued that “卫生” was selected because its meaning of “health”
specifically includes “hygiene” and “sanitation,” which are critical
elements in containing the spread of diseases and in safeguarding public
health.

*
*

*Why has IMIA not lodged objections against other strings like “.doctor”*

IMIA’s response to this is that its “priority is to make sure that one Top
Level Domain (TLD) can be protected and identified as a safer place for
health information.”  They also emphasize that they are prioritizing a TLD
that cover health broadly (i.e., strings like .doctor and .medical are
considered as too limited and specialized and maybe regulated in some
countries already – all of which are subsets of health).  It can be argued
that IMIA’s interest in a broad understanding of health encompasses aspects
of healthiness or wellbeing or wellness, which is supported by their
identification of problematic statements in the applications being objected
upon, including the one by Stable Tone Limited. **

*
*

*Can the use of ”**健康**” **cause confusion against the industry identified?*

It depends on whether or not Chinese-speaking consumers differentiate
between “health” and “healthy” when they see the string.  If they don’t
differentiate, then the potential for confusion exists.

The applicant indicated that the target market is Chinese-speaking Internet
users in general and primarily targeted at potential registrants and
Internet users in Mainland China.  In reality, given the borderless nature
of the Internet, the potential market is Chinese-speaking consumers both
inside and outside of Mainland China.  There is a significant
Chinese-speaking population in other countries in Asia as well as other
regions.

 A random survey can easily determine if consumers differentiate “健康” /
“jian kang” in terms of “health” and “healthy”.  I did a simple test with a
rough and ready method involving a small sample and asked Chinese-speaking
individuals in Mainland China, Malaysia and Singapore (who are ordinary
users and not related to ICANN or the domain name industry) about their
views regarding the string.  The response is startling in that there is
variation including among those from Mainland China.  Most view the string
as “healthy”, but they also view it as BOTH “health” and “healthy”. A
minority view it as purely health.  Views that the string means “health” or
both “health and healthy” would be problematic for the applicant in that it
would defeat its argument that the target consumers do differentiate
between the two, which is the basis for excluding “健康” from the community
objection on .health.


A proper random survey by an independent party involving a large sample
size that controls for biases can elucidate the situation (i.e., refute or
confirm), but the possibility of confusion exists until proven otherwise.
Should the case for confusion be established, the issue then is what
proportion of the market is likely to be confused and whether the
proportion can be considered as negligible.

*Can the use of ”**健康**” **cause harm to consumers?*

This is the most important question and it allows the debate to go beyond
the string interpretation issue and focus on the substance of the proposed
TLD.  In essence, the use of ”健康” can cause harm if consumer protection
cannot be adequately safeguarded irrespective of whether “the distribution
of and exchange of information, products and services” are related to
health or healthy lifestyle.  It is important to bear in mind that
information, products and services on “healthy lifestyle” do impact health.



Stable Tone’s application would inspire more confidence (and can be
improved) if it had provided sufficient information in terms of how
potential harm to consumer health can be constrained and what safeguards
will be in place.



The following are some areas of concern along these lines:


(1) Representatives of Stable Tone indicated that the string (.健康) is “not
focussed on the type of specific health-related services that may be within
the ambit of any regulated industry such as the medical industry”.

------- This venture into an “unregulated industry” that implicates health
raises concerns in terms of how consumer protection will be addressed.  *[Note:
the commitment to not venture into a regulated industry requires
contractual enforcement from ICANN, which is still uncertain.]*



(2) Stable Tone highlighted that “the lack of monitoring and abuse
mitigation has led to a plethora of websites with fraudulent, unhealthy,
even dangerous products and information” and that “it will take both
technical as well as policy measures to differentiate and distinguish .健康TLD
(.jiankang) from other TLDs rife with abusive domains which seek to
misguide and defraud the consumers.”

------- These are good commitments, but the question is how.  How would
Stable Tone go about policing the TLD to protect consumers and which
authoritative body/individuals would it consult in determining what is
unhealthy or dangerous in an “unregulated industry”?  The claim that the
government will be watching and will take action is problematic in a
situation where the industry is acknowledged to be unregulated.



*In Conclusion*



The At-Large community has a responsibility to advance and protect end user
interests.  In the case of health or anything related to health, the
responsibility to protect is immense and it is appropriate to be
cautious.  IMIA
as a credible advocate and representative of the global health community
has stepped forward to express its concern and objection with clear
justifiable grounds.  The At-Large new gTLD Review Group has tested IMIA’s
objection against 4 very strict criteria, which no other entity has
succeeded in passing, and the Review Group has deemed the objection to be
in scope and relevant.



I am sympathetic to the case of Stable Tone.  I recognize that it takes a
considerable amount of effort and resources to apply for a TLD and I am
viewing the application as an entrepreneurial initiative that was made in
good faith with the intent to provide a namespace with innovation and
consumer benefits.  A TLD with a market as large as China plus the rest of
the Chinese-speaking world has a very high revenue-generating
potential.  Should
consumer health be adversely affected due to insufficient safeguards, it is
the public health care system that will bear most of the burden (if not
all).



A venture into any area impacting any aspect of health requires special
care and safeguards for consumer protection.  I would recommend that Stable
Tone be asked to provide clear guidelines and expand on its ideas for
protecting consumer interests towards developing acceptable and appropriate
measures for consumer health/wellbeing protection related to the proposed
use of the TLD.



I urge APRALO to consider this case very carefully in its “vote”, which is
due tomorrow (i.e., March 6th) by way of the RALO Chair, and I hope that
the above contributes to the thinking about the issue.



Sincerely,


Rinalia Abdul Rahim