[lac-discuss-en] Geographic Names at Second Level

Wed Jul 5 18:45:59 UTC 2017

Totally agree Lance. But there are also several aspects related to users choice that need to be taken into account. For instance, majority of country codes managers does not want competition internally their borders and this is not the best choice for national users, wherever they are.  Other international rules also needed to be repeated as trade marks . For instance: if a country have granted the trade mark to a geographic name that belongs to it like, for instance,  here “Copacabana”   then if the company Copacabana that had such trademark  has the right to use it in the way they like and to have a TLD can be proved as been one of those “ways” they have the granted right…
Vanda Scartezini
Polo Consultores Associados
Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004
01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253
Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464
Sorry for any typos.
HAPPY 2017!

From: <lac-discuss-en-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>> on behalf of Lance Hinds <brainstreetceo at gmail.com<mailto:brainstreetceo at gmail.com>>
Date: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 at 15:28
To: Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com<mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>>
Cc: LACRALO list <lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org>>
Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Geographic Names at Second Level

The fact of the matter is that in 2017 the geographic names, and their derivatives, should be regarded as critical assets for national development. Thoughtful policies therefore regarding the stewardship and protection of that asset must be implemented in support that overall goal. The CEO indicated during the meeting that he is open to continuing discussions on this issue. If the fundamental mandate of the at-large is the interests and/or protection of the average user, there is no question that this issue requires further deliberation on our part.

My two cents

Lance

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com<mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear All:
Allow me to share some facts from an incident.  Years ago, back in 2009, a media conglomerate based in Bermuda commissioned me to define and frame a strategy to extend the analog yellow page telephone directory concept to the digital and for the internet. All Caribbean countries were included; they owned and published the entire lot, north to south, east and west, every dot in the sea that had a public telephone system. We devised a plan with a baseline requirement for domain names that 'made sense'; portalize them for traffic concentration, shaping, management and eventually, exploitation.

We discovered that Barbados, Jamaica, Cayman [Islands], Bermuda and several others were already registered in the .com space. And the owners were not connected in any way to the countries. This discovery lead to my exploring the contours of the DNS marketplace for the first time.

Since we were advising a commercial operation, we contacted the registrant of record hoping to negotiate and conclude a commercial transaction for transfer. Not a problem, they responded.  Starting price, US$1M for each. The owners of the yellow page directories did not blink on price. Their existing business model almost guaranteed them income once the telephone number was listed. And up until then what they had was a license to mint money; my estimate of the free cash generated across the entire set of printed directories across the Caribbean was between US$40-$60M per annum. End result is they did not take to the monetisation plan based on selling ads from landings on the [portal] page. It was way to novel for them at the time. So they said no to the entire plan.

These domains are still owned by commercial interests without recourse to official administration of countries  or ccTLD interests.  And some even resolve and are used for exactly what we had intended. Any consideration we give to geographic names at second level, be it 2-character or 3-character, will have to deal with these facts as they are.

-Carlton

==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799<tel:(876)%20818-1799>
Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
=============================

2017-07-05 4:19 GMT-05:00 <aidanoblia at gmail.com<mailto:aidanoblia at gmail.com>>:

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

 == utf-8? Q? _of_5_geogrnames = C3 = A1? _-_ New_pista_5? = =? Utf-8?
 Desde: aidanoblia at gmail.com<mailto:aidanoblia at gmail.com>

 According to Humberto's proposals, especially with regard to addressing
 The issue from the point of view of the end user in our region.

 Although I am not expert, the subject has worried to the community LACRALO,
 Directly affected and was discussed a long time ago, with respect to a
 Pair of specific cases, in relation to names of two characters of our
 Region that referred to geographical areas.

 Now at the GAC meeting with ALAC, ICANN 59,
 More focused on new and three-character domain names,
 Also presented on the screen a rather long questionnaire, in which
 Sought to reach agreement on each question, although
 Different positions.

 The foundations were, on the one hand, the right of applicants to have
 The domain name that they freely choose, on the other, the right of the
 Internet users residing in the geographical areas
 Respects their right to preserve such names for uses relating to the area
 And in the interests of end-users
 Could easily be confused about discriminating
 Names correspond to official or governmental sites or companies or
 People or issues relating to your location or region.

 In principle and from my very modest point of view, as expressed in the
 JNB meeting, this is something that is already confusing and causes some
 Conflicts: different interests are at stake.

 On the one hand: the interest of business and commerce in their freedom of
 Choose domain names that are economically disadvantaged if they are
 Limit their rights.

 On the other hand, the rights of residents in the regions
 Could be affected by commercial use, although as seen in JNB,
 In some cases that may not be important for users in the region
 Respectively. In this case, a consent was
 The issue of whether or not to collect and how.

 On the other hand, the interest of end users of
 Internet, which could be confused, not only with reference to trade
 Of goods and services.

 As set out in the ICANN Bylaws and its implementing rules,
 Which must be defended by representatives of the interests of
 The end users of internet is the interest of these.

 The other commercial interests, defend themselves and thus
 Made at that meeting.

 I understand that another interest at stake is, according to the legislation of each
 Country, the right of consumers, among other rights, not to be
 Cause confusion, in relation to certain products or services that are
 Offered on the net. This interest as consumers comes to be confused with
 Many cases with those of the end user of the internet, with the
 Whereas consumer protection is widely legislated in the
 different countries. Although the meeting did not address the rights of
 the consumers.

 Greetings to all
 Aída

 The 3 of July of 2017, 16:59, Vanda Scartezini <vanda at scartezini.org<mailto:vanda at scartezini.org>>
 wrote:

> Hola Alejandro.
> Si no hay consenso en ninguna parte. Hay una posición más radical de unos
> especialmente del GAC respecto nombres de dominio que puedan ser utilizados
> como geográficos – preguntas surgen:
> A) como se vá controlar esto, quien por ejemplo controlaria el “uso
> geográfico” de un nombre como SPA – su localización en SPA ya mereceria ser
> cualificado como uso geográfico y por lo tanto no aceptable?
> El sub grupo 5 tiene la intención de discutir cuestiones como eta e
> proponer una solución para cada punto
> B) se uno tiene la marca SPA para seguir con el mismo ejemplo, la
> comunidad de SPA tiene o no el derecho de utilizar su denominación
> geográfica y seria esto una violation de una regra, si tal regla vier a
> existir?
> Etc.
>  La idea de crear esto grupo mira solución a estos conflictos – por esto
> mismo el grupo debe ser reduzido para lograr alcanzar un consenso. En
> principio dentro de la cross community se piensa que puede ser una idea
> razonable.
> A ver lo que el GNSO concretamente piensa y se manda proseguir o no.
>  Sigo en followup y vuelvo a ustedes.
> Fuerte abrazo.
>
> A ti ALEx, conto que sentimos tu falta – el almuerzo del board con los
> former members fue concentrado en recuerdos para ICANN history. Creo que
> tienes mucho a contribuir. No olvides de enviar tus recuerdos de los
> primeros tiempos para el staff Melissa King <melissa.king at icann.org<mailto:melissa.king at icann.org>>
> Abraços
>
>
>
> *Vanda Scartezini*
>
> *Polo Consultores Associados*
>
> *Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004*
>
> *01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil*
>
> *Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253<tel:%2B55%2011%203266.6253> <+55%2011%203266-6253>*
>
> *Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464<tel:%2B%2055%2011%2098181.1464> <+55%2011%2098181-1464> *
>
> *Sorry for any typos. *
>
> *HAPPY 2017!*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: "lac-discuss-es-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>" <
> lac-discuss-es-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org>> on behalf of Alejandro
> Pisanty <apisanty at gmail.com<mailto:apisanty at gmail.com>>
> Date: Thursday, June 29, 2017 at 16:16
> To: "lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org>" <
> lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org>>
> Cc: LACRALO list <lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org>>
> Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-es] procedimientos posteriores seguimiento de 5
> nombres geográficos - nueva pista 5
>
> Vanda,
>
> el mismo argumento de haberr estado en el tema desde 2010 invita también a
> algunas consideraciones diferentes:
>
> 1. en fechas recientes pudimos observar que en LACRALO imperan puntos e
> vista diversos y hasta opuestos sobre los ccTLDs y el control que éstos
> deben tener sobre las combinaciones de caracteres similares a las de sus
> nombres de dos y de tres caracteres; no se alcanzó un consenso;
>
> 2. sería pertinente que presentaras un informe acerca del estado de la
> cuestión en general, y de los puntos que siguen sin resolver;
>
> 3. entre las organizaciones de LACRALO hay algunos conflictos de interés
> en esta materia; por ejemplo, algunas organizaciones son también operadoras
> de ccTLDs, otras tienen  intervenciones en el mercado de nombres genéricos,
> y en otras los directivos son simuláneamente funcionarios públicos y
> representantes nacionales ante el GAC;
>
> 4. sería conveniente que además de proponer tu propio nombre dieras a
> conocer al menos dos alternativas, para poder analizar con libertad si
> conviene más la continuidad o la rotación, y ciertamente para que al menos
> un representante te acompañe en estas funciones con el objeto de
> desarrollar la capacidad de que te substituya posteriormente.
>
> Lo mismo se aplica a otros grupos de trabajo y participantes. El grupo de
> trabajo de gobernanza haría una gran contribución si estudiara el número
> máximo de cargos simultáneos que puede servir un representante individual.
>
> Saludos cordiales,
>
> Alejandro Pisanty
>
> 2017-06-29 9:17 GMT-05:00 <vanda at scartezini.org<mailto:vanda at scartezini.org>>:
>
>>
>> [[--Translated text (en -> es)--]]
>>
>>  Asunto: procedimientos posteriores seguimiento de 5 nombres geográficos
>> - nueva pista 5
>>  De: vanda at scartezini.org<mailto:vanda at scartezini.org>
>>
>>  Queridos todos - No sé cómo se seleccionará cada región por lo que estoy
>> agregando lACRALO lista para escuchar su opinión.
>>  Me gustaría poner mi nombre como miembro de la &quot;región de LAC&quot;
>> según lo sugerido por GNSO (no miembro formal de ALAC)
>>  Gracias por su consideración
>>  Esto es una propuesta de Jeff Neuman en este momento, y creo que es una
>> idea divina, y esta idea hará que los grupos sean mucho más eficientes, más
>> transparentes y tomen la opinión de cada región por ALAC, por los gobiernos
>> ... para un proceso Para la pista 5 - la cruz de los nombres geográficos de
>> la comunidad.
>>  También estoy en el grupo de trabajo de seguimiento 1 sobre
>> procedimientos subsiguientes.
>>  Estoy saltar antes de la mano sólo porque después de esto desde 2010 he
>> estado muy interesado en el tema.
>>
>>
>>  gracias
>>
>>
>>  Vanda Scartezini
>>  Polo Consultores Associados
>>  AV.Paulista 1159, cj 1004
>>  01311-200 - Sao Paulo, SP, Brasil
>>  Línea terrestre: +55 11 3266.6253<tel:%2B55%2011%203266.6253> <+55%2011%203266-6253>
>>  Móvil: + 55 11 98181.1464<tel:%2B%2055%2011%2098181.1464> <+55%2011%2098181-1464>
>>  Lo siento por cualquier error tipográfico.
>>  ¡FELIZ 2017!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

[[--Original text (es)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/fedae95d83.html
--]]

_______________________________________________
lac-discuss-en mailing list
lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en

_______________________________________________
lac-discuss-en mailing list
lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en

--
Lance Hinds
Chief Technology Officer
BrainStreet Group
287 'C' Albert St.
Georgetown Guyana

This message contains information that may be privileged and/or confidential and is the property of BrainStreet Technologies or BrainStreet Learning. The information contained herein is intended only for the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to receive it . If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or take  any action in reliance to the contents of this information or any part thereof and it may be unlawful to do so. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message from your system. BrainStreet Technologies or BrainStreet Learning are neither liable for the proper and complete transmission of the information contained in this communication nor any delay in its receipt.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/attachments/20170705/c8003f30/attachment-0001.html>