Allow a manual-review / brand-ownership override for the automated name-similarity block

[mihneadevries]

Summary: The automated name-similarity filter blocks new package names that are "too similar" to an existing package, with no appeal or manual-review path. I'd like to propose an override for cases where the applicant can demonstrate genuine brand ownership.

My case: I tried to publish retasc and it was rejected as too similar to the existing package recast. retasc is a real product with its own domain (retasc.com) and its own npm scope (@retasc, under which @retasc/cli is already published). The names differ by more than half their letters and are not plausibly typosquats of one another.

What support told me: There is no brand-ownership exception or manual-review path once a name is blocked by the automated similarity check — even if the applicant can verify domain ownership and control of the matching scope — and I was directed here to file feedback.

The gap: The anti-typosquat filter is valuable, but a hard block with zero human recourse produces false positives that legitimate publishers can't resolve. A scoped package proves org ownership; domain verification proves brand control. Either (or both) should be sufficient signal for a reviewer to release an unscoped name.

Proposal: Add a lightweight manual-review path for name-similarity rejections, gated on (a) ownership of the matching npm scope and/or (b) verified domain ownership matching the requested name. This keeps the automated filter as the default while giving real brands a way out of false positives.

Thanks for considering.

[github-actions[bot]]

Thank you for your interest in contributing to our community! We currently only accept discussions created through the GitHub UI using our provided discussion templates. Please re-submit your discussion by navigating to the appropriate category and using the template provided.

This discussion has been closed because it was not submitted through the expected format. If you believe this was a mistake, please reach out to the maintainers.