<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><br class=""><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class=""><p lang="en-US" style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><b class="">Subject : ICANN
Board consideration of .amazon application. 15 May 2019, (published
preliminary report 26 May 2019.)</b></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><span lang="en-US" class=""><a href="https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/prelim-report-2019-05-15-en" class="">https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/prelim-report-2019-05-15-en</a></span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">The .amazon point is
addressed in pages 35-55 ; the relevant Resolution was adopted
by 13 Board members with two abstentions.<br class=""><br class="">In my view, the
unresolved impasse between Amazon Inc.·and ACTO derives in large
measure from the failure in the 2012 AGB to adequately regulate
applications for geographical names.<br class=""><br class="">In short, as widely
reported already elsewhere, the ICANN Board has over-ridden the
objections of the countries concerned (the ACTO members) to proceed
with the processing of the .amazon application from Amazon Inc., in
spite of the reported failure to reach agreement between Amazon
Inc.·and ACTO.<br class=""><br class="">The purpose of this note is primarily to draw
the attention of the new gTLD PDP and to WT5, that these issues will
have to be addressed before the new gTLD programme can be
successfully launched. For future reference, it is absolutely
essential that the current PDP and WT5 agree on specific and globally
applicable rules for applications for, and eventual delegations of,
geographical names. Otherwise, issues arising over the <.amazon>
application could very well be repeated across a wide range of future
applications, world-wide.<br class=""><br class="">In the case in point, the Board and
several recent comments (CircleID, The Register, Internet Governance
Project) have attached weight to the outcome, in July 2017, of an
Independent Review Process which supported Amazon Inc.'s application.
Hoover, this IRP's proceedings and report were quite questionable in
several respects, as I pointed out to the Co-Leads of the PDP and WT5
at the time.</span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><br class="">
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">I attach my note of
November 2017 to that effect.<br class=""><br class="">In conclusion, I must maintain
most firmly that whatever conclusions are reached in the .amazon
case, with or - apparently without - agreement between Amazon Inc.·
and ACTO, this sad story can in no way be taken as a precedent for
future applications for geographical names which are presently
considered by GNSO to be unprotected and thus eligible for open
applications for new gTLDs.<br class=""><br class="">It is quite essential for the
success of the new gTLD programme that the currently very restrictive
policy for prior authorisation or non-objection to geographical names
be extended to all such applications.</span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><br class="">
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">Regards,</span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><br class="">
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">Christopher
Wilkinson<br class="">Jávea, 2 June 2019</span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><br class="">
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><span lang="en-US" class=""><br class="">Attachment:
Note to PDP and WT5 Co-Leads of 7 November 2017.</span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><br class="">
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><span lang="en-US" class=""> * * *</span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in" class=""><br class="">
</p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in; page-break-before: always" class=""><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">From: </span></font><font size="2" class=""><a href="mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu" class="">cw@christopherwilkinson.eu</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class=""> [</span></font><font size="2" class=""><a href="mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu" class="">mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">] <br class="">Sent: Tuesday,
November 7, 2017 2:40 PM<br class="">To: Martin Sutton
<</span></font><font size="2" class=""> <a href="mailto:martin@brandregistrygroup.org" class="">martin@brandregistrygroup.org</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">>;
Annebeth B. Lange <</span></font><font size="2" class=""><a href="mailto:annebeth.lange@norid.no" class="">annebeth.lange@norid.no</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class=""> >;
Olga Cavalli <</span></font><font size="2" class=""><a href="mailto:olgacavalli@gmail.com" class="">olgacavalli@gmail.com</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">>;
Christopher Wilkinson <</span></font><font size="2" class=""> <a href="mailto:cw@christopherwilkinson.eu" class="">cw@christopherwilkinson.eu</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">><br class="">Cc: Emily
Barabas <</span></font><font size="2" class=""><a href="mailto:emily.barabas@icann.org" class="">emily.barabas@icann.org</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class=""> >;
Julie Hedlund <</span></font><font size="2" class=""><a href="mailto:julie.hedlund@icann.org" class="">julie.hedlund@icann.org</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">>;
Steve Chan <</span></font><font size="2" class=""><a href="mailto:steve.chan@icann.org" class="">steve.chan@icann.org</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">>;
Cheryl Langdon-Orr <</span></font><font size="2" class=""><a href="mailto:langdonorr@gmail.com" class="">langdonorr@gmail.com</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class="">>;
Jeff Neuman <</span></font><font size="2" class=""><a href="mailto:jeff.neuman@comlaude.com" class="">jeff.neuman@comlaude.com</a></font><font size="2" class=""><span lang="en-US" class=""> ></span></font><span lang="en-US" class=""><br class=""><br class=""></span><span lang="en-US" class=""><b class="">Subject: .amazon
IRP</b></span><span lang="en-US" class=""><br class=""><br class="">Good
evening:<br class=""><br class=""></span><a href="https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-amazon-final-declaration-11jul17-en.pdf" class="">https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-amazon-final-declaration-11jul17-en.pdf</a><span lang="en-US" class=""><br class=""><br class="">Having
returned from Abu Dhabi, I have had the opportunity to read the
Independent Review Panel Declaration on <dot.amazon> (pp 67).
<br class=""><br class="">This turns out to have been a significant benchmark with
respect to several aspects of our forthcoming work of WT5. For
instance:<br class=""></span><br class="">
</p>
<dl class="">
<dd lang="en-US" class="">- it is noticeable that the whole IRP procedure
does not recognise, or even refer to, the fact that the Amazon name
has been in the public domain for decades, if not centuries, and in
any case long before ICANN or Trademark law existed. WT5 should
recognise that geographical names are generally already in the
public domain and are used to represent the places that people use
them for. The very widespread sensitivities about the DNS and most
geographical terms arise from the risks, some would say the threats,
arising from the commercial monopolization of such names in the
DNS.<br class=""><br class="">
</dd><dd lang="en-US" class="">
- the composition and location of the Panel in this case invites
comment. It is hardly plausible for the ICDR and ICANN to accept
that an issue, primarily beyond US jurisdiction, should be
arbitrated by three US lawyers, based on hearings in Los Angeles.
Whatever the principles and rules devised by the PDP and WT5, I
doubt that they would enjoy widespread acceptance if eventual future
disputes would be subject to such an IRP.<br class=""><br class="">
</dd><dd lang="en-US" class="">
. the IRP addresses, in exhaustive detail, the internal procure the
ICANN Board and its NGPC. But it completely ignores the social,
cultural and political dimensions of the issue. Outside the “ICANN
bubble” this will appear rather curious, to the point of
de-legitimising the underlying ADR policy. <br class=""><br class="">- The costs of
this IRP have been exorbitant, amounting to some $480,000, not
including attorneys fees. In the case in point, Amazon (Luxembourg)
and ICANN could no doubt afford it, but more generally, if dispute
resolution in the policy that PDP and WT5 intend to create is beyond
the reach of most geographical communities, then I wonder what we
are doing here?<br class=""><br class="">
</dd></dl>
<blockquote class="">
<span lang="en-US" class="">For most communities, the issue is not <.amazon>,</span><span lang="en-US" class=""><i class="">
per se,</i></span><span lang="en-US" class=""> but the precedent. <br class=""><br class="">The
DNS cannot override the historical interests of the general public in
names that have been in the public domain, as long as most people can
remember, without a clear mechanism whereby their acquired rights
will be respected.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote lang="en-US" class="">Just a few thoughts, that WT5 should be able
to deal with in the months to come.<br class="">Regards Christopher.</blockquote></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></body></html>