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@christopherwilkinson.eu CW < mail@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@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@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@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@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
_______________________________________________ CPWG mailing list CPWG@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg
_______________________________________________ GTLD-WG mailing list GTLD-WG@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@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg _______________________________________________ registration-issues-wg mailing list registration-issues-wg@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/registration-issues-wg
-- Greg Shatan greg@isoc-ny.org "The Internet is for everyone"