{"id":487,"date":"2026-07-30T09:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-07-30T09:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/string-similarity-evaluation-gtld-brands\/"},"modified":"2026-07-30T09:00:00","modified_gmt":"2026-07-30T09:00:00","slug":"string-similarity-evaluation-gtld-brands","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/blog\/string-similarity-evaluation-gtld-brands\/","title":{"rendered":"ICANN string similarity rules: can a gTLD that looks like your brand pass?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>On 30 July 2026 ICANN published the data and guidelines its panel will use for the string similarity evaluation of every gTLD applied for in the 2026 round. The evaluation blocks or groups new top-level domains that look visually like existing TLDs or like each other, but it does not compare them with trade marks. If a new gTLD looks like your brand, the protection is a Legal Rights Objection that you must file yourself.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><strong>Update (October 2026):<\/strong> on 22 September 2026 ICANN confirmed 1,663 applications received, of which 1,616 proceed, and said Reveal Day, when the applied-for strings become public, would take place no later than 14 October. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.icann.org\/en\/announcements\/details\/icann-confirms-number-of-applications-proceeding-in-the-2026-round-22-09-2026-en\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">ICANN, 22 September 2026<\/a>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<h2>Key takeaways<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li>The String Similarity Evaluation (SSE) Guidelines and SSE Data, version 1.0 of 23 July 2026, are the final versions for the 2026 round.<\/li>\n<li>The test is <strong>visual only<\/strong>: whether two strings are so visually similar that delegating both creates a probability of user confusion.<\/li>\n<li>A string found visually similar to an existing gTLD or ccTLD cannot proceed; one similar to another application goes into a contention set.<\/li>\n<li>Trade marks are outside the comparison. Brand owners act through the <strong>Legal Rights Objection<\/strong> before WIPO.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>What did ICANN publish on 30 July?<\/h2>\n<p>The <a href=\"https:\/\/www.icann.org\/en\/announcements\/details\/icann-publishes-string-similarity-evaluation-data-and-guidelines-30-07-2026-en\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">announcement<\/a> released two documents: the SSE Data, which records pairs of characters that script experts consider similar and the level of similarity, and the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.icann.org\/sites\/default\/files\/packages\/lgr\/sse\/string-similarity-evaluation-guidelines-23jul26-en.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">SSE Guidelines<\/a>, which tell the independent panel how to use that data. An SSE tool runs a pre-screening report of potential contention sets; the panel then adjusts, adds or removes sets and must give reasons, particularly when it departs from the tool.<\/p>\n<p>The rules sit in section 7.10 of the <a href=\"https:\/\/newgtldprogram-2026-agb.icann.org\/en\/11-module-7-string-and-application-evaluation-procedures.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2026 Round Applicant Guidebook<\/a>. Each applied-for string, and its variants in other scripts, is compared with existing gTLDs and ccTLDs, strings still in process from earlier rounds, requested IDN ccTLDs, other 2026 applications, a subset of Blocked Names and every two-letter ASCII string.<\/p>\n<h2>How does the string similarity evaluation gTLD test work?<\/h2>\n<p>Script experts classified character pairs on five levels. The guidelines then translate those levels into a presumption for whole strings:<\/p>\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th>Level<\/th>\n<th>Meaning<\/th>\n<th>Treatment<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>1<\/td>\n<td>Identical or near identical (homographs, defined variants)<\/td>\n<td>Visually similar<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>2<\/td>\n<td>Highly confusable<\/td>\n<td>Visually similar<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>3<\/td>\n<td>Similar<\/td>\n<td>Probably visually similar<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>4<\/td>\n<td>Distantly or weakly similar<\/td>\n<td>Not likely similar<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>5<\/td>\n<td>Distinct<\/td>\n<td>Not similar<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>The panel can override the presumption only with a clear, and in some cases strong, rationale. Where a case is hard to decide, the guidelines tell it to take the conservative approach and mark the strings as similar. The guidelines also cover uppercase and lowercase forms, characters shared across scripts (Latin, Cyrillic and Greek being the obvious examples) and the underline that browsers add to links, which can hide the difference between strings such as &#8220;good&#8221; and &#8220;qood&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>Two exclusions matter. Aural similarity and similarity of meaning are not assessed here. And singular and plural forms go through a separate notification process, which anyone can trigger within 30 days of String Confirmation Day.<\/p>\n<h2>Does the evaluation protect your trade mark?<\/h2>\n<p>No. The panel compares TLD strings with other TLD strings, not with trade mark registers. A brand that is not itself a delegated TLD or a pending application is not on the comparison list. <a href=\"https:\/\/newgtldprogram-2026-agb.icann.org\/en\/8-module-4-community-input-objections-and-appeals.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Module 4 of the Guidebook<\/a> sets out what rights holders can do instead:<\/p>\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th>Mechanism<\/th>\n<th>Who acts<\/th>\n<th>Test<\/th>\n<th>Window<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>String Similarity Evaluation<\/td>\n<td>ICANN&#8217;s panel, automatically<\/td>\n<td>Visual similarity to other TLD strings<\/td>\n<td>During string evaluation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>String Confusion Objection (WIPO)<\/td>\n<td>TLD operators, ccTLD parties, other applicants<\/td>\n<td>Visual, aural or meaning similarity to a TLD string<\/td>\n<td>104 days from String Confirmation Day, plus 30 days after updated contention sets<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Legal Rights Objection (WIPO)<\/td>\n<td>Holders of registered or unregistered marks, some IGOs<\/td>\n<td>Unfair advantage, impairment of distinctiveness or likelihood of confusion with the mark<\/td>\n<td>104 days from String Confirmation Day<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>A brand owner without its own TLD has no standing for a String Confusion Objection. The Legal Rights Objection is its tool. WIPO&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wipo.int\/en\/web\/amc\/domain-name-disputes\/lro\/fees\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">LRO fee schedule<\/a> lists USD 2,000 to file and USD 8,000 for a single-member panel. Objections must be filed in English.<\/p>\n<h2>What this means for your business<\/h2>\n<ol>\n<li>Prepare a watch list now: your main marks, close spellings and versions in other scripts used in your markets.<\/li>\n<li>Check the list on Reveal Day against the published strings. The SSE report will not do this for you.<\/li>\n<li>Gather evidence before String Confirmation Day: registrations, use and reputation in each jurisdiction where the mark matters.<\/li>\n<li>Decide on objections within the 104-day window; late filings are not accepted.<\/li>\n<li>If you applied for a .brand, monitor the SSE outcomes: a string marked similar to an existing TLD cannot proceed, though Guidebook section 7.10.4 provides a challenge route.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>If you need a watch and objection plan coordinated across your portfolio, our <a href=\"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/services\/domain-names\/\">domain name and new gTLD protection team<\/a> can build it around the published timeline.<\/p>\n<h2>When to bring in an adviser<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Assuming ICANN will stop a look-alike TLD.<\/strong> The panel protects the DNS, not your brand.<\/li>\n<li>Missing the window. Objections are tied to String Confirmation Day; nobody reminds you.<\/li>\n<li>Weak evidence. A Legal Rights Objection turns on the reputation and use of the mark, which must be documented country by country.<\/li>\n<li>Choosing the wrong ground. Standing differs by objection; a misfiled objection costs fees and time. Where a dispute goes further, our <a href=\"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/services\/legal-ip\/\">IP enforcement team<\/a> handles the follow-up.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>Frequently asked questions<\/h2>\n<h3>Does ICANN compare new gTLDs with registered trade marks?<\/h3>\n<p>Not in the string similarity evaluation. The panel compares applied-for strings with existing TLDs, earlier applications still in process, ccTLDs, other 2026 applications, some Blocked Names and two-letter strings. A trade mark owner that considers a new gTLD infringes its rights must file a Legal Rights Objection with WIPO within the objection window.<\/p>\n<h3>Is aural or conceptual similarity taken into account?<\/h3>\n<p>Not by the evaluation panel, which looks only at visual similarity. Aural similarity and similarity of meaning can be raised through a String Confusion Objection, but only by parties with standing, such as existing TLD operators or other applicants. For brand owners, similarity in sound or meaning is argued within a Legal Rights Objection.<\/p>\n<h3>Can IP Global Guard monitor the 2026 applications and object for us?<\/h3>\n<p>Yes. We build the watch list, review the strings published on Reveal Day, assess whether an objection is justified and prepare and coordinate Legal Rights Objections before WIPO, directly when our professionals are qualified and otherwise through qualified representatives, from a single point of contact.<\/p>\n<h2>Protect your brand in the 2026 round with IP Global Guard<\/h2>\n<p>The 2026 round will publish hundreds of new strings in a short window, and only rights holders who are ready will be able to object in time. IP Global Guard, the IP services line of META Channel Corporation Limited, coordinates domain and trade mark protection across more than 25 jurisdictions in Europe, Latin America and Africa with one strategy and one billing relationship.<\/p>\n<p>Send us the marks you want to watch and the markets where they matter. We will set up the watch list before Reveal Day and tell you which strings deserve action. <a href=\"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/contact\/\">Contact our new gTLD team<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p><em>This article is general information, not legal advice, and reflects the position on the date of publication.<\/em><\/p>\n<h2>Sources<\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.icann.org\/en\/announcements\/details\/icann-publishes-string-similarity-evaluation-data-and-guidelines-30-07-2026-en\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">ICANN, ICANN publishes String Similarity Evaluation Data and Guidelines (30 July 2026)<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.icann.org\/sites\/default\/files\/packages\/lgr\/sse\/string-similarity-evaluation-guidelines-23jul26-en.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">ICANN, String Similarity Evaluation Guidelines for the New gTLD Program: 2026 Round, v1.0 (23 July 2026)<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/newgtldprogram-2026-agb.icann.org\/en\/11-module-7-string-and-application-evaluation-procedures.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">ICANN, 2026 Round Applicant Guidebook, Module 7, section 7.10<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/newgtldprogram-2026-agb.icann.org\/en\/8-module-4-community-input-objections-and-appeals.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">ICANN, 2026 Round Applicant Guidebook, Module 4, objections and appeals<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.wipo.int\/en\/web\/amc\/domain-name-disputes\/lro\/fees\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">WIPO, Legal Rights Objection fees<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.icann.org\/en\/announcements\/details\/icann-confirms-number-of-applications-proceeding-in-the-2026-round-22-09-2026-en\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">ICANN, ICANN confirms number of applications proceeding in the 2026 round (22 September 2026)<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>ICANN published the 2026 round string similarity data and guidelines. The test is visual and ignores trade marks, so brand owners must rely on objections.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1115,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"wds_primary_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[36],"tags":[60,62,58],"class_list":["post-487","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-domain-names","tag-icann","tag-new-gtlds","tag-wipo"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/487","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=487"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/487\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1115"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=487"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=487"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipglobalguard.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=487"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}