[lac-discuss-en] carta .amazon

Sun Mar 31 17:45:13 UTC 2019

Masterful summary, Sir Lance.

For the record, this is a political dispute for which a commercial
agreement is the only proffer for solution.

Amazon the company has followed all the ICANN rules existing at the time
and has come out ahead. That is the way the multi stakeholder
framework works.

ICANN cannot in good conscience and may not rubbish the commitments to
abide by its own processes as vested in the rules. Because that would
grossly undermine the multi stakeholder framework to which we are
subscribed.

Second, Amazon the company has been in quiet possession of it brands for
decades which it has heretofore registered in all ACTO countries without
pushback.

My reading of the proposal on the table allows for the shared use and
benefits accrued from the DNS resources framed by .amazon  for ACTO
countries. There is even a concession to some involvement with its
governance to ACTO countries.

Value accrues from delegation. And these DNS resources left undelegated are
of little to no value to every party involved.

In my view Amazon the concessions now on the table need to be fully
explored without the emotion of the politics.

- Carlton Samuels

On Fri, 29 Mar 2019, 11:04 am Lance Hinds, <brainstreetceo at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Frank,
>
> This should give you a rough idea of the background on this matter
>
> *Introduction*
>
>
> In the interest of a better understanding and clarity of this
> conversation, some introductory information would be useful.
>
> The management, stability, governance and policy making for the internet
> is the responsibility of a California company called International
> Cooperation of Assigned Names and Numbers commonly known as ICANN.
>
> This company is structured conceptually along multistakeholder lines with
> a series of constituencies represent the Private Sector, civic society,
> academia and government. The Government Advisory Committee (GAC) is the
> constituency that is responsible for provision of policy advice and
> guidance to the ICANN Board of Directors.  GAC is comprised primarily of
> the Ministries responsible internet governance and information technology
> in general. In our case the Ministry of Public Telecommunications
> represents the Government of Guyana at the GAC meetings
>
>
>
> *2012 & 2013*
>
> Amazon Inc. files and application to ICANN requesting the delegation of
> the “.amazon” TLD.  This would result in the monopolization of the
> registered name in the DNS.
>
> ----------------------------------
>
> Brazil and Peru timely objected to the request for registration of
> “.amazon” on the grounds that there is an inextricable relation between
> this TLD name and the Amazon region, the Amazon peoples, the Amazon natural
> heritage and the Amazon culture.
>
> -------------------------------------
>
> The Member states of the Amazon Basin subsequently endorsed the object of
> Brazil and Peru.
>
> They further invoked the EL Coca Declaration of May 3, 2013; expressing
> firm rejection to any claim of ownership by others of geographical names of
> the countries of ACTO in general and the name “.amazonia” or related,
> without the consent of the Amazon Countries.
>
> Countries represented in the GAC endorsed the position of ACTO.
>
> The GAC, by full consensus, expressed to the ICANN Board of Directors the
> existing international opposition to the delegation of the “.amazon” TLDs,
> as recorded in the "GAC Communiqué" adopted on July 18, 2013 in Durban.
>
> *2014*
>
> *May 14*
>
> Based on the declaration by the GAC, the ICANN Board, through the New
> gTLD Program Committee (NGPC), decided not to grant the company's request.
>
> --------------------------
>
> Subsequently, several meeting were held between the Amazon countries and
> the company in hopes of establishing a “modus vivendi”. In order to allow
> the commercial exploitation of the ".amazon" TLDs by the company, while at
> the same time safeguarding the countries’ right to use the TLDs for the
> public interest, in line with national strategies and for the benefit of
> the local peoples. However, neither party could accept the different
> proposals presented by the other at that time.
>
> *2015*
>
> *October 6*
>
> New proposal was submitted by Amazon Inc.
>
> The proposal provided for the shared use of the ".amazon" TLDs, both by
> the company for its private ends, and by the Amazon countries for uses
> associated with the Amazon region and peoples. The ACTO Council considered
> that the dispute had come to an end following the Board’s decision of 2014,
> and that the Member States were bound to reject the 6 October 2015
> proposal, given the absence of a mandate from the Ministry of Foreign
> Affairs authorizing them to examine the new proposal.
>
> *2016*
>
> In view of the decision by the ICANN Board to reject the “.amazon”
> application, as well as the failure to reach an agreement with the Amazon
> countries, the company pursued the avenue of formal arbitration through the
> ICANN via the establishment of an Independent Review Panel (IRP),
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> In this context, Brazil and Peru submitted to the GAC a proposal for GAC
> advice requesting the Board not to follow the IRP recommendation. The
> rationale for the advice was that, if the Board were to follow the IRP
> recommendation, it would be completely denying the role of governments in
> ICANN’s multi-stakeholder governance model, in which it is the
> responsibility of governments to identify the relevant public policy issues
> and how they interact with ICANN’s activities.
>
> The Brazilian-Peruvian document clarified, on the other hand, that the
> decision by the governments in this case, additionally, based itself on an
> evaluation of the *political sensitivity* that the subject raised. The
> other ACTO Member States endorsed the position Brazil and Peru expressed in
> their document.
>
>
>
> *2017*
>
> *July 10 *
>
> The IRP issued its Final Declaration on 10 July 2017. The IRP considered
> that the decision of the Board to deny the company’s application would have
> violated ICANN rules. The opinion of the IRP was that the Board had not
> adequately motivated its decision of 2014, having relied exclusively on the
> opinion of the GAC that was opposed to the delegation of the “.amazon”
> TLDs. Thus, it recommended that the Board should reexamine the company’s
> applications, and that it explains whether it accepts or rejects them
> based on the Board’s own evaluation of the public policy reasons associated
> with the delegation and the exploitation of the “.amazon” intended by the
> company.
>
>
>
> *September 23*
>
> The Board refrained from accepting the “Panel’s non-binding
> recommendation” that it re-evaluates the application for the “.amazon”
> TLDs, and consequently tasked an internal advisory body “to review and
> consider” that very recommendation and “to provide options for the Board to
> consider in addressing [it]”.
>
>
>
> *October 29*
>
> The GAC was prompted to resume consideration of the subject.
>
> A proposal was presented by Amazon Inc. (paragraph 28 of the Tena
> Declaration) to the Amazon countries during the 60th meeting of the ICANN
> in Abu Dhabi (Oct 28-Nov 3, 2017).  It stated that it encourages and
> instructs technical and operational bodies of the Member countries to carry
> out a review of the proposal by Amazon Inc. to reach a common position on
> the subject of dot.amazon.
>
> The proposal mentions that the company will:
>
> 1.      Block culturally sensitive names at the second level
>
> 2.     Consult with relevant governments to identify these terms
>
> 3.     Provide support for applications. AMAZONAS, .AMAZONIA, AMAZONICA
>
>
>
> During the Abu Dhabi ICANN meeting the Board had invited the GAC to
> provide information about the reasons why governments opposed the company’s
> request in 2013, which led to the Board’s rejection of the company’s
> application for the “.amazon” TLDs. The request was made in order to
> prepare how the Board will react to the IRP recommendation, which, as
> recalled, suggested that the Board examines whether there are public policy
> reasons justifying the rejection of the company’s application for the
> “.amazon” TLDs. The invitation by the Board generated an intense debate
> within the GAC, where most of the participating countries expressed their
> objection to responding to it in the requested terms, lest their response
> be interpreted as an acceptance that the GAC should account to the Board
> for the public policy reasons that governments are responsible for
> identifying or deciding. It was agreed at the Abu Dhabi that the ACTO
> countries will create a working group to deliberate on the latest Amazon
> proposal and report to the GAC.
>
>
>
> *December 1*
>
> The Working Group was established pursuant to paragraph 28 of the Tena
> Declaration which was adopted by a number of Ministers and high-level
> government representatives inclusive of Guyana.
>
> *2018*
>
> *February 7*
>
> The company sent to the ACTO Permanent Secretariat an updated proposal.
>
> *February 8 *
>
> The Working Group held a plenary meeting start consideration of the 7
> February, 2018 proposal followed by subsequent meetings throughout February.
>
>
>
> *March *
>
> Meetings and consultations on the February 7, 2018 continued into March.
>
> Documents containing further elements of clarification were also sent to
> the Secretariat from Amazon Inc.
>
> At the 61st ICANN meeting, in Puerto Rico, the GAC met again to discuss
> how to react to the invitation by the Board. The governments agreed to send
> it a response that, on the one hand, reported on the progress in the search
> for a compromise solution by the Amazon countries, through the Working
> Group established under the auspices of ACTO; on the other hand, it
> reiterated the terms of the communiqué adopted by the GAC in Abu Dhabi, on
> 1 November 2017. Hence, the GAC confirmed that it will not again discuss
> the public policy reasons that justified its objection to the delegation of
> the “.amazon” TLDs in the past, and it reiterated to the Board the need for
> a solution having the acceptance of ACTO Member Countries if the requested
> delegation is to be allowed.
>
> Where we are since March is a matter of public record.
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free.
> www.avg.com
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> <#m_-289167164323217390_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Fri, Mar 29, 2019 at 8:54 AM franco giandana <fgiandana at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> [[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]
>> [[--This message had format issues and was not translated properly--]]
>>
>>
>> Subject:Re:  carta .amazon
>> Desde:franco giandana <fgiandana at gmail.com>
>>
>> I am new to this discussion but I believe Lance might have a point here,
>> we should try to move forward on a more solid basis, not that much on a
>> conceptual or argumentative basis since it seems it did not make the
>> expectation back then: Lance, seems you have a much stronger background on
>> this issue than me, do you have any suggestions we could all analyze?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Frank
>>
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 04:48 Lance Hinds <brainstreetceo at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> [[--Translated text (en -> es) -]] [[--This message had format issues and
>> was not defined properly--]] Subject: Re: letter .amazon From: Lance Hinds <
>> brainstreetceo at gmail.com> This has been the same message since 2012. It
>> can not be enough simply to say that "the realization of this action
>> translates into ignorance of ancestral rights, cultural and social
>> traditions of the countries of the Amazon region." It is provided. To some
>> extent, this was the same difficulty when the government expressed its
>> concerns.There are currently discussions between the governments of the
>> Amazon basin and Amazon Inc. to ensure that most, if not all, of these
>> rights are conserved in some way. Also, my dear friend Juan, in order to
>> obtain possible support for your cause, it may be useful to remember that
>> Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru are not the only members of the
>> Amazon Basin. Other members have also actively participated in discussions
>> / negotiations. Sincerely, Lance Hinds Free of virus.
>>   [ERROR: Sentence too long to translate (1087> 1000 bytes)]On this
>> occasion, the ICANN Board is open to demonstrations from the countries of
>> the region to make the decision to delegate the .amazon domain.As part of
>> ICANN's Constituency for Non-Profit Operational Concerns (NPOC), AGEIA
>> Colombia has decided to show its dissatisfaction with the delegation of the
>> .amazon domain for commercial and in vita purposes to other civil society
>> organizations that are part of it. from different groups of voters in ICANN
>> Participate in some way in the internet ecosystem to pronounce.
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hlubhnb_nTamU5l1QEJxgrx7wm-Ch7jso-oIfLU5228/edit?
>> usp = sharing We appreciate your support and dissemination in this matter
>> because the time before the Board makes the decision to delegate is reduced
>> every day. The board will wait until April 6 to make decisions.JUAN MANUEL
>> ROJAS P. President - President of the Membership Committee of AGEIA DENSI
>> Colombia. Unit of Non-Profit Operati
>>  onal Concerns (NPOC) - ICANN Cluster Orinoco TIC member IT candidate
>> Master, University of the Andes Cel. + 57 3017435600 Twitter: @JmanuRojas
>> [[- - Original text (s) (s) Translated by transbot 2.18 -2.04
>> http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/3b22f86305.html -]]
>> _______________________________________________________ lac-Discuss-en
>> mailing list lac -discuss-en @ atl arge-lists.icann.org https: //
>> atlarge-lists. icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en - Lance Hinds
>> Director of Technology B Group 287 'C' Albert St.Georgetown Guyana This
>> message contains information that may be privileged and / or confidential
>> and is the property of Bumos Technologies or Basically Learning. The
>> information contained in this document is intended only for the person or
>> entity to which it is addressed and other persons 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 relation
>> to the content
>>  of this information or part of it, and it may be illegal to do so. If
>> you receive this message in error, notify the sender immediately and delete
>> all copies of this message from your system.B uses Technologies or Bada
>> Learning are not responsible for the correct and complete transmission of
>> the information contained in this communication or any delay in its
>> reception. [[--Original text (en) Translated by transbot 2.18-2.04
>> http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/0f06ab221c.html -]]
>> _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list
>> lac-discuss-en @ atlarge- lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
>> http://www.lacralo.org
>>
>> [[--Original text (es)
>> Translated by transbot 2.18-2.04
>> http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/1f02ab5720.html
>> --]]
>> _______________________________________________
>> lac-discuss-en mailing list
>> 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.
>
>
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free.
> www.avg.com
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
> <#m_-289167164323217390_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> _______________________________________________
> lac-discuss-en mailing list
> lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/attachments/20190331/9c095ed1/attachment-0001.html>