[registration-issues-wg] [CPWG] [GTLD-WG] Board resolution regarding .amazon

Greg Shatan greg at isoc-ny.org
Thu Sep 20 04:39:05 UTC 2018


My first reaction to this is similar to Maureen's, I think. WT5 should give
further consideration to a "sharing" option to resolve conflicts between
governments and applicants with regard to applied-for strings that have
both geographic and non-geographic meanings/uses.  This option could be
promoted, and a pathway to using the option could be created.  I think it
should remain an option to be freely chosen (or not), rather than a
preferred outcome.  Technically, it was an option in the prior round, since
any applicant could have made a deal with the relevant public authority to
engage in a shared use. But, without any real precedent or publicity, it
wasn't a natural choice to make.

I doubt we can come up with a policy in WT5 (are there other "geo-names
work groups"?) that would *prevent* this kind of battle in the future.  But
I question whether "prevention" should be our goal.

One way to "prevent" a battle like this is to pick a winner in advance that
covers an entire category of battles.  Of course that requires defining a
(broad or narrow) category.  To some extent, the current policies do that
in several defined categories.

Christopher suggests the most extreme version of this: "Geographical names
must be held available to be used for those geographical purposes."  I
assume this means that every string that has any geographic meaning
(regardless of any other meanings/uses) should be reserved in perpetuity
until an applicant comes along who wants to use the string for a
geographical purpose.

The opposite outcome has also been suggested, i.e., other than terms on one
of the Applicant Guidebook lists, all other terms are free to be applied
for and delegated as gTLDs for any purpose.

Another option is to use one of the existing objection processes, or to
create an objection process for this purpose, which would then be resolved
through a dispute resolution process,  But I suppose that is not
"prevention."

As for implementing the resolution, I expect a simpler solution, where
certain second-level domains (or groups of second-level domains) would be
allocated for use by the countries in the region.  For instance, ar.amazon
and argentina.amazon could be allocated for use by Argentina, perhaps with
further terms of geographic or cultural significance to, e.g., Argentina.
Conceivably, third-level domains could be available for public registration
by individuals (e.g., manoff.argentina.amazon) or could be allocated by the
public authority.  This doesn't require any financial or commercial
relationship except with regard to the costs of implementing and
maintaining this by the registry.  (Which raises the question of who is to
be the registry in this case...).
Best regards,

Greg


On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 1:53 PM mail at christopherwilkinson.eu CW <
mail at christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:

> Good evening:  I shall read the details later, but for now just to say
> that this may be an inevitable compromise  - if agreed - in the light of
> the mistakes in the 2012 Round, but it is not an example, precedent or a
> template for other situations in the future.
>
> Geographical names must be held available to be used for those
> geographical purposes.
>
> Regards
>
> CW
>
>
> El 19 de septiembre de 2018 a las 17:57 Carlton Samuels <
> carlton.samuels at gmail.com> escribió:
>
> Intriguing for sure. I'm zeroing in on the language of the resolution,
> specifically "*sharing the use of those top-level domains with the ACTO
> member states*".
>
> Until someone can show and convince me that the string existed at the
> second level in quiet possession without damage alleged to the cultural
> heritage and said string as trademark is registered in said states without
> wreaking havoc on the cultural heritage associated, that claim was weak, at
> best.
>
> The kerfuffle gets real if you follow the money. The value of the string is
> accrued and accounted only if it is delegated.
>
> Since any solution that emerge is likely commercial, maybe this is
> indicating acceptance of a tithing model as per Amazon the company giving a
> little bit of the value of each transaction to member states as they now do
> with the Amazon Smile initiative; you shop and they donate to the
> customer's selected charitable organisation. Or, fraught as that might be,
> Amazon the company collects a use tax on behalf of the member states.
>
> Putting up a web page that extols the many Amazonian virtues cannot be it!
>
> Get the acceptable dollar figure in objective and work the edges. It really
> isn't that hard, once we remove the cloak of Potiphar's wife!
>
> -Carlton
>
> ==============================
> *Carlton A Samuels*
>
> *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment &
> Turnaround*
> =============================
>
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 9:59 AM Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> While this is indeed some progress am really curious to see what the
> details of the solution will look like, how 1 can effectively stand in 2 or
> more places remains a puzzle to solve.
>
> Regards
>
> Sent from my mobile
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos
>
> On Wed, 19 Sep 2018, 11:07 Sebastien Bachollet, <sebicann at bachollet.fr>
> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
> It can be of interest in our discussion about future possible TLDs
> All the best
> SeB
>
>
> https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2018-09-16-en#2.d
>
> Resolved (2018.09.16.12), ICANN's President and CEO is directed to
> support the development of a solution for delegation of the strings
> represented in the .AMAZON applications that includes sharing the use of
> those top-level domains with the ACTO member states to support the cultural
> heritage of the countries in the Amazonian region.
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> registration-issues-wg mailing list
> registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> registration-issues-wg mailing list
> registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
>
> _______________________________________________
> GTLD-WG mailing list
> GTLD-WG at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gtld-wg
>
> Working Group direct URL:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/New+GTLDs
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPWG mailing list
> CPWG at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
> _______________________________________________
> registration-issues-wg mailing list
> registration-issues-wg at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
>


-- 
Greg Shatan
greg at isoc-ny.org

"The Internet is for everyone"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/registration-issues-wg/attachments/20180920/8b7f9005/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg


More information about the registration-issues-wg mailing list