- lac-discuss-es - lists.icann.org

Fwd: Amazona gana un buen precedente
by hcarrascob＠gmail.com July 24, 2017

July 24, 2017

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Fwd: Amazona gana un buen precedente De: hcarrascob(a)gmail.com > De: Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob(a)ucn.cl> > Fecha: 24 de julio de 2017, 05:05:15 CLT > Para: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org, lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Asunto: Fwd: [IGP Announce] Amazon win sets good precedent > > > JULY 23, 2017 > AMAZON WIN SETS GOOD PRECEDENT > In a victory for fairness and rule-based Internet governance, an independent review panel (IRP) has decided that ICANN was wrong to deny retailing giant Amazon, Inc. the top level domain AMAZON. Key elements of the decision were unanimous, particularly the conclusion that the Board “cannot accept GAC consensus advice as conclusive.” ICANN’s board, in denying the application, failed to provide sufficient reasons for doing so, the panel ruled. The majority of the panel also concluded that the GAC was at fault for not treating Amazon fairly. > > We believe the IRP made the right decision, and we hope the ICANN board and the GAC will come to their senses and simply allow the TLD to be awarded to Amazon and be done with it. The main roadblock to this obvious solution is the perception, which we believe to be misguided, that objections from Latin American countries have some merit and therefore some “win-win” solution, most likely involving payoffs to someone, must be found. This will just muddy the waters and prolong the dispute. > > We prefer a cleaner solution with better long-term consequences for Internet governance – a solution that does not encourage governments or other objectors to make claims not based in any law or engage in hold up politics in the future. We need to recognize that certain countries were playing identity politics and making bad arguments, and turn our back on that. > > Here’s why the objections to the .AMAZON application are baseless: > > Good governance requires clear, pre-specified and objective rules – rule of law, not rule of men. Amazon followed ICANN’s application rules. None of the strings applied for by Amazon are listed as ‘geographic names’ in ICANN’s Applicant Guidebook, and thus were not subject to government pre-approval. The new gTLD process also anticipated applications for “brand” top level domains and there was nothing unexpected about it. The objectors to the application were trying to change the rules in the middle of the game. > The parties objecting to the application had no application of their own, no alternative ideas about how to use the domain. Indeed, in an attempt to resolve the dispute, Amazon reputedly offered to cover the costs of applying for AMAZONAS or AMAZONIA, but there were no takers. (In the region itself, as well as in many other parts of the world, the region goes by those names) They just wanted to prevent Amazon from having it. > Objectors never provided even a minimally plausible case that this appropriation harmed anyone or anything. The .AMAZON application was challenged using ICANN’s “community objection” criteria, but an expert report found that the TLD “would not pose a material detriment to the region or the people who inhabit the geographic region proximate to the Amazon River.” > The horse is already out of the barn. If indeed .AMAZON constituted some kind of illegitimate cultural appropriation, then why doesn’t AMAZON.COM? Or all the Amazon trademarks? There is no rational distinction between any of these uses. Can anyone show how the people or environment of the Amazon region have been harmed by the use of these names? > The .AMAZON case is a good example of how, during its new gTLD program, ICANN allowed its processes to be hijacked by politics, usually emanating from the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). In numerous cases, pre-established rules and principles were abandoned and application guidelines modified on the fly simply because the GAC wanted to have discretionary power over top level domain applications. > > In the AMAZON case this led to a palpably absurd result. A regime that was established to mediate domain name – trademark conflicts denied an application by a company for its own name – a company that had a registered trademark for AMAZON in over 170 nations, and whose use of the name is so well-known globally that it has obtained secondary meaning (in English) that is largely unrelated to the South American region. And it denied the application not because someone else also wanted the name, and not because of any harm to a community, but simply because a few representatives of Latin American governments wanted to flex their muscles. > > Regardless of whether Amazon actually gets the TLD, this case has important precedent value. The ruling says that the ICANN board cannot simply defer to consensus GAC advice. If it upholds that advice, it must set forth reasons and explain why the reasons reflect “well-founded and credible public policy interests.” As one of the panelists noted, “For me, the key requirement is that there be a ‘well-founded’ basis for the [Board’s] conclusion.” Once Amazon had rebutted the presumption in favor of following GAC advice, he wrote, “the burden of making that showing became ICANN’s to bear. It failed to do so.” > > > > > Inicio del mensaje reenviado: > >> De: "Internet Governance Project" <info(a)internetgovernance.org> >> Fecha: 24 de julio de 2017, 01:54:47 CLT >> Para: hcarrascob <hcarrascob(a)ucn.cl> >> Asunto: [IGP Announce] Amazon win sets good precedent >> Responder a: "Internet Governance Project" <info(a)internetgovernance.org> >> >> >> >> >> July 24, 2017 >> >> Amazon win sets good precedent >> More Recent Articles >> Amazon win sets good precedent >> >> In a victory for fairness and rule-based Internet governance, an independent review panel (IRP) has decided that ICANN was wrong to deny retailing giant Amazon, Inc. the top level domain AMAZON. Key... >> >> Read the whole entry » >> >> >> • Email to a friend • >> More Recent Articles >> >> >> ICANN Jurisdiction Working Group Reaches Critical Juncture >> How ICANN is manipulating its GDPR discussions >> The curious policies in NIST’s proposed RPKI study >> Click here to safely unsubscribe from "IGP Blog." >> Click here to view mailing archives, here to change your preferences, or here to subscribe • Privacy >> Email subscriptions powered by FeedBlitz, LLC, 365 Boston Post Rd, Suite 123, Sudbury, MA 01776, USA. [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/d50c4310b5.html --]]

1 0

Fwd: [IGP Announce] Amazon win sets good precedent
by Humberto Carrasco July 24, 2017

July 24, 2017

JULY 23, 2017 AMAZON WIN SETS GOOD PRECEDENT In a victory for fairness and rule-based Internet governance, an independent review panel (IRP) has decided that ICANN was wrong to deny retailing giant Amazon, Inc. the top level domain AMAZON. Key elements of the decision were unanimous, particularly the conclusion that the Board “cannot accept GAC consensus advice as conclusive.” ICANN’s board, in denying the application, failed to provide sufficient reasons for doing so, the panel ruled. The majority of the panel also concluded that the GAC was at fault for not treating Amazon fairly. We believe the IRP made the right decision, and we hope the ICANN board and the GAC will come to their senses and simply allow the TLD to be awarded to Amazon and be done with it. The main roadblock to this obvious solution is the perception, which we believe to be misguided, that objections from Latin American countries have some merit and therefore some “win-win” solution, most likely involving payoffs to someone, must be found. This will just muddy the waters and prolong the dispute. We prefer a cleaner solution with better long-term consequences for Internet governance – a solution that does not encourage governments or other objectors to make claims not based in any law or engage in hold up politics in the future. We need to recognize that certain countries were playing identity politics and making bad arguments, and turn our back on that. Here’s why the objections to the .AMAZON application are baseless: Good governance requires clear, pre-specified and objective rules – rule of law, not rule of men. Amazon followed ICANN’s application rules. None of the strings applied for by Amazon are listed as ‘geographic names’ in ICANN’s Applicant Guidebook, and thus were not subject to government pre-approval. The new gTLD process also anticipated applications for “brand” top level domains and there was nothing unexpected about it. The objectors to the application were trying to change the rules in the middle of the game. The parties objecting to the application had no application of their own, no alternative ideas about how to use the domain. Indeed, in an attempt to resolve the dispute, Amazon reputedly offered to cover the costs of applying for AMAZONAS or AMAZONIA, but there were no takers. (In the region itself, as well as in many other parts of the world, the region goes by those names) They just wanted to prevent Amazon from having it. Objectors never provided even a minimally plausible case that this appropriation harmed anyone or anything. The .AMAZON application was challenged using ICANN’s “community objection” criteria, but an expert report found that the TLD “would not pose a material detriment to the region or the people who inhabit the geographic region proximate to the Amazon River.” The horse is already out of the barn. If indeed .AMAZON constituted some kind of illegitimate cultural appropriation, then why doesn’t AMAZON.COM? Or all the Amazon trademarks? There is no rational distinction between any of these uses. Can anyone show how the people or environment of the Amazon region have been harmed by the use of these names? The .AMAZON case is a good example of how, during its new gTLD program, ICANN allowed its processes to be hijacked by politics, usually emanating from the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC). In numerous cases, pre-established rules and principles were abandoned and application guidelines modified on the fly simply because the GAC wanted to have discretionary power over top level domain applications. In the AMAZON case this led to a palpably absurd result. A regime that was established to mediate domain name – trademark conflicts denied an application by a company for its own name – a company that had a registered trademark for AMAZON in over 170 nations, and whose use of the name is so well-known globally that it has obtained secondary meaning (in English) that is largely unrelated to the South American region. And it denied the application not because someone else also wanted the name, and not because of any harm to a community, but simply because a few representatives of Latin American governments wanted to flex their muscles. Regardless of whether Amazon actually gets the TLD, this case has important precedent value. The ruling says that the ICANN board cannot simply defer to consensus GAC advice. If it upholds that advice, it must set forth reasons and explain why the reasons reflect “well-founded and credible public policy interests.” As one of the panelists noted, “For me, the key requirement is that there be a ‘well-founded’ basis for the [Board’s] conclusion.” Once Amazon had rebutted the presumption in favor of following GAC advice, he wrote, “the burden of making that showing became ICANN’s to bear. It failed to do so.” Inicio del mensaje reenviado: > De: "Internet Governance Project" <info(a)internetgovernance.org> > Fecha: 24 de julio de 2017, 01:54:47 CLT > Para: hcarrascob <hcarrascob(a)ucn.cl> > Asunto: [IGP Announce] Amazon win sets good precedent > Responder a: "Internet Governance Project" <info(a)internetgovernance.org> > > > > > July 24, 2017 > > Amazon win sets good precedent > More Recent Articles > Amazon win sets good precedent > > In a victory for fairness and rule-based Internet governance, an independent review panel (IRP) has decided that ICANN was wrong to deny retailing giant Amazon, Inc. the top level domain AMAZON. Key... > > Read the whole entry » > > > • Email to a friend • > More Recent Articles > > > ICANN Jurisdiction Working Group Reaches Critical Juncture > How ICANN is manipulating its GDPR discussions > The curious policies in NIST’s proposed RPKI study > Click here to safely unsubscribe from "IGP Blog." > Click here to view mailing archives, here to change your preferences, or here to subscribe • Privacy > Email subscriptions powered by FeedBlitz, LLC, 365 Boston Post Rd, Suite 123, Sudbury, MA 01776, USA.

2 1

Fwd: Statement - Amazonians speak about .amazon
by Carlos Raul Gutierrez July 23, 2017

July 23, 2017

Carlos Raúl GUTIERREZ Apartado 1571-1000 San José COSTA RICA ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Renata Aquino Ribeiro" <raquino(a)gmail.com> Date: Jul 21, 2017 12:23 Subject: Statement - Amazonians speak about .amazon To: <NCSG-DISCUSS(a)listserv.syr.edu> Cc: This statement is open now to sign up endorsements https://bestbits.net/amazon/ Amazonians speak about .amazon We, the people in the Amazon, would like you to stop talking about us without hearing us first ***** This is a response about the latest decision in the delegation process of the .amazon new gTLD domain by the Independent Review Panel at ICANN to Amazon https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-amazon- final-declaration-11jul17-en.pdf The context of this dispute is summarised in this article http://domainnamewire.com/2017/07/18/amazon-com-gets- big-win-domain-battle-may-yet-get-amazon-domain/ **** In light of the twists in the process of the new gTLD .amazon, many parties have come forward speaking "for the benefit of the people of the Amazon" and staking their claim that they were doing what is best for the region development. Not once, during all this time, anyone cared to ask what our thoughts are or what we think the best for our region is. Well, we would like to ask all parties to stop talking about us as if we can't speak for ourselves. It must not be forgotten that the Amazon region involves the population of nine South American nation-states. For us, this is a time of challenges over the Amazon such as illegal mining, deforestation, water pollution among others. Any policy decision about the region or its name (in any language) is a matter of great interest for all of us, and we cannot be left aside. Let's start with the view of .amazon being a brand as well as a region and a river. We were never asked, again, when the name was used in the first place. The consequences of this can be seen now, when we are mistaken as a faceless, plain, uncharacteristic area in a world map without content or people, an exoticly empty part of the world to be conquered and debated abstractly by trademark lobbyists, private companies and governments. We have faces, names, content, history. Using our name to tell another story, a company's history, would de-characterize us? Likely not. We will not disappear. Instead the Amazon is a vibrant region, which bets on sustainable development and becomes increasingly more involved with internet governance, alongside with Northeast Brazil, which hosted IGF2015. However, using our name without acknowledging our importance is certainly a mistake. Using our name refers directly to a vast land of rich diversity, with much to uncover and with many cultural gems already discovered. So if using our name, at least acknowledge us, respect us. Give back to the "lung of the Earth," to a river which hosts hundreds of communities by its riverbanks. Invest on us. We want the same you do, more education, a thriving internet market and respect to sustainable development for a better future. It is also important to note that ICANN's Independent Review Panel comes at a moment when the discussion about the use of geographical names is very controversial, as it was seen in meetings in Johannesburg. And it is surprising, given there is no consensus yet about this theme in the community. Governments of nine nations also speak our name. With such ownership and familiarity that you could sometimes forget that we do not belong only to one of them. The Wikipedia, which also does not belong to only one company or government, can enlighten that: "This region includes territory belonging to nine nations. The majority of the forest is contained within Brazil, with 60% of the rainforest, followed by Peru with 13%, Colombia with 10%, and with minor amounts in Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Guyana, Suriname and French Guiana. States or departments in four nations contain "Amazonas" in their names. The Amazon represents over half of the planet's remaining rainforests, and comprises the largest and most biodiverse tract of tropical rainforest in the world, with an estimated 390 billion individual trees divided into 16,000 species." This means that even if you agree with nine governments on whatever decision they take on the Amazon, you could still be in disagreement to half of the planet, and their thoughts on the importance of our region. Governments representational crisis is real and does not belong to one country or another. Governments should listen to their citizens. Yet, none of our major political powers are located in the Amazon and have not spoken to us about any aspect of the recent process. This becomes much more complicated when the Amazon is referred to as an area of indigenous population. Our indigenous population was not asked when colonized, the majority did not elect the government of the nine nation-states which comprise the Amazon. Likely, the majority of our indigenous population suffers from abandonment, land conflicts, health crisis and lack of an education system. More importantly, our indigenous population wants, just as companies or governments, an internet market which provides jobs and enables development. Indigenous population may not speak only Portuguese or Spanish but they can speak too. So why does everyone insists on talking about us without listening to us? The rainforest is disappearing fast. This process is not going to slow down unless there is responsibility from all stakeholders in a dialogue about our region and how to respect it. When referring to the new gTLDs or any issue of public policy, public and private sector need to address us, we are all part of a cross border region and an strategic navigation channel and this dialogue has to take this unique situation in account. It must not be forgotten that, after all, the multistakeholder model that we all support to have a free and open Internet, involves multiple parties. This is not only an issue of the private sector and governments, the population is a key participant, that in this particular matter was never consulted. So please, consult us. Don't take our name without talking to us. Stop talking about us as if we can't speak. Renata Aquino Ribeiro - Brasil Worked with Amazon region researchers and maintains an independent research group with collaborators in the region. Mixed ethnicity with relatives and friends in the region. Lives in NE Brazil. NCUC ICANN LAC representative. IGF MAG Civil Society 2016-2017. Lilian Ivete Deluque Bruges - Colombia Lives in Barranquilla, Colombia. Works in local government with indigenous population and vulnerable groups. Mixed ethnicity. Alumni from the South School of Internet Governance 2016. LACNIC27 fellow. Bertnell Auclene Malisa Richards - Guyana Lives in Georgetown, Guyana. Works with education and technology. Plans on creating IGF Guyana. ICANN58 fellow. NCUC ICANN member. LACRALO ICANN Member, ISOC Guyana. Patricia Vargas - Peru Researcher, PhD Candidate, School of Information Studies, Syracuse University. . Lia Solis - Bolivia LACNOG Program Committee member, LACNIC member, ICANN Fellow, LACRALO ICANN participant, ISOC Bolivia Board. Maureen Hernandez - Venezuela. ISOC Venezuela board of directors. Systems Engineer working with community networks in Central and Latin America. Born and raised in Venezuela and has been meeting indigenous communities for connectivity development for the last 2 years. Jessica Botelho - Brazil Journalist. Researcher at the Federal University of Amazonas / CNPq. Member of the ISOC Youth Observatory and the Center for Studies and Practices in Cyberculture (Manaus, Amazonas, Northern Brazil). Student of the Brazil Internet Governance School 2016 and the InternetLab School 2017. Maurília Gomes - Brazil Public Relations. Master in Communication Sciences. Researcher of cyberculture and social activism. Member of ISOC Brazil. Lives in Manaus, Amazon. Member of the Popular Audiovisual Center (CPA), an organization that works on human rights, indigenous population, land conflicts and climate change. Is also a member of the Center for Studies and Practices in Ciberculture (NepCiber). Mixed ethnicity with indigenous descent. Alumni from the Brazilian School of Internet Governance 2015. Hemanuel Veras - Brazil Journalist. Master in Communication Sciences. Researcher of cyberculture and democracy. Lives in Manaus, Amazon. Member of the Popular Audiovisual Center and the Center for Studies and Practices in Ciberculture (CPA/NepCiber). Alumni from the Brazilian School of Internet Governance 2016. Allan Gomes - Brazil Journalist. Researcher of cyberculture. Lives in Manaus, Amazon. Coordinator of the Popular Audiovisual Center (CPA) and member of the Center for Studies and Practices in Ciberculture (NepCiber). Approved to the Brazilian School of Internet Governance 2017. Sebastian Roa - Brazil Currently lives in the state of Amazonas. Journalism student and researcher of the study group of urban anthropology. Also research adolescents indigenous in the urban context and TICS. Currently work with UN with the Venezuelan emergency. Member of the Center for Studies and Practices in Ciberculture (NepCiber). Approved to the Brazilian School of Internet Governance 2017. Sinuhe Nascimento e Cruz - Brasil Born and raised in the State of Acre, the most werstern state in the brazilian amazon. Currently lives in São Paulo, where is developing a bachelor’s degree in Law at the University of São Paulo. Founder member of the Nucleum of Studies on Technology and Society of the University of São Paulo and also a member of the Environmental Law Clinic Paulo Nogueira Neto at the Law School of the University of São Paulo. Paola Perez - Venezuela Vice - president ISOC Venezuela and co- Chair LACNIC Public Policy Forum, OEA Cybersecurity Bootcamp fellow 2017, South School internet Governance 2016 alumni, ICANN LACRALO and NCUC member. Luã Fergus Researcher, born and raised in the Amazon region, Master's degree student in Sao Paulo, Brazil.

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] IO recomienda .amazon reconsideration
by evanleibovitch＠gmail.com July 23, 2017

July 23, 2017

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: IO recomienda .amazon reconsideration De: evanleibovitch(a)gmail.com Creo que estamos atrapados en los detalles, no en el concepto general. Pido disculpas por no ser lo suficientemente incluyente, pero no desearía que ese error oscureciera el punto más amplio. Si el correo electrónico original hubiera dicho nueve países en lugar de cinco, ¿cómo habría cambiado su respuesta? ¿Cuáles son las objeciones sustantivas? (Y tenga en cuenta que no estoy promoviendo esto como una respuesta perfecta ... sólo sugiriendo que es un punto medio que ambos lados encuentran un poco subóptimo, pero menos doloroso que batallas costosas en curso). -Evan El 21 de julio 2017, 17:19, a las 17:19, Ricardo Holmquist <rihogris(a)gmail.com> Escribió: > Hola, > No comparto la solución dada, pero más allá de eso, contiene > Errores geográficos, mi país no está siendo incluido en la lista de El > Cinco países, porque esta persona está suponiendo que sólo tiene que ver con El > Río, y para nosotros es también el bosque, donde tenemos cerca del 25% de nuestro > Territorio. El estado donde se encuentra la selva amazónica se llama > Amazonas, > Y no está siendo incluido en los 3 países con territorios llamados > Amazonas. > > Mejor > > Ricardo Holmquist > ISOC Venezuela > > < https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> Libre > El virus. Www.avast.com > < https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> > <# DAB4FAD8 - 2DD7 - 40BB - A1B8 - 4E2AA1F9FDF2> > > 2017-07-21 15:28 GMT-05: 00 Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> : > >> He leído en un grupo de Facebook, de Barry Shein, una imaginativa y OMI >> resolución efectiva a la cuestión de .amazon.Lo ofrezco aquí con algunos >> sugerencias personales agregadas en relación a 'lo que viene a continuación': >> >> Amazon paga por la creación del TLD ".amazonas", y lo confía A un >> sin fines de lucro cuyas partes interesadas son exclusivamente de los cinco países > (Brasil, >> Colombia, Ecuador, Perú, Bolivia) a través del cual corre el río. Tal >> las partes interesadas pueden ser gubernamentales, ONG o privadas. A cambio, el GAC >> rescinda su objeción a .amazon. >> >> (Alternativamente, dot-amazonas podría ser confiado a los tres >> gobiernos - en Perú, Colombia y Brasil - que son nombrados > "Amazonas".) >> >> Después de todo, "Amazonas" es el nombre local del río en español > Y >> Portugués. Dado que en otros lugares los gobiernos están recurriendo a nombres locales Más bien >> que los anglicizados - piensa Beijing, Iqaluit o Bengaluru - No lo haría >> esto sea una buena cosa y una respuesta razonable tanto a los gobiernos > Y >> la librería? >> >> Tal oferta haría que la mayor parte de la objeción lógica a la Librerías >> deseo por el nombre, al mismo tiempo que pide a los países En realidad >> indican lo que harían con un TLD apropiado, o al menos Reservar >> para uso futuro. >> >> ¿Sería posible un compromiso semejante? ¿O podría causar un problema por >> poniendo en evidencia a los objetores actuales sobre lo que harían Hacer con >> ¿El TLD? >> >> (Tal vez esto re-abre un problema más amplio con los nombres geoTLD, preguntándose Si >> todos los nombres lingüísticos posibles para los países y regiones son Merecedor de >> protección. Quiero decir, ¿necesitamos proteger a "Schweiz", "Suisse", > "Svizzera", >> "Svizra", "Helvetia" Y "Suiza"?) >> >> - Evan >> >> Unesdoc.unesco.org unesdoc.unesco.org >> lista de correo de lac-discuss-en >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >> >> [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/4552dd491b.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] IO recomienda .amazon reconsideration
by evanleibovitch＠gmail.com July 23, 2017

July 23, 2017

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: IO recomienda .amazon reconsideration De: evanleibovitch(a)gmail.com Hola Ricardo, > â[...] â > It might work, with great effort from the civil society, (since there are > great cultural differences among all our countries), but then, the actual > political situation of the countries is the worst in the last... (I really > don't know when all this nine countries have a good relationship since > Columbus discovery!). Will all of them agree to create a entity (preferable > a multistakeholder one) to handle this .amazonas? > Desde simple a resolver. Sin embargo.... ¿No surgen estos mismos problemas con .amazon también? Si la librería no debería tener .amazon, ¿quién debería hacerlo? Sus comentarios sugieren (y no tengo ninguna razón para estar en desacuerdo) que cualquier Esfuerzos para asignar a .amazon enfrentarían el mismo Colaboración entre nueve países (e incluso más Estados / regiones) con una Y objetivos a menudo contradictorios. Si es probable que no haya Acuerdo sobre cómo los sudamericanos administrarían .amazon, cuál es el daño Hecho por darlo a la librería para que al menos * alguien * pueda hacer uso De ella? Si el solicitante de .amazon fue (por ejemplo) una empresa de turismo peruano En lugar de una librería estadounidense, la oposición a la asignación de ICANN Todos los demás países con reclamaciones (o oposición a una Con fines de lucro que tiene)? ¿O es la intención real de la oposición gubernamental que .amazon simplemente ¿Queda inutilizado por alguien? ¿Es este camino beneficioso para el público? Esto no es un troll o intento de insulto. Realmente no entiendo. Evan PS: Si algo de esto está siendo discutido en LAC-Discutir, no puedo ver esa parte De la discusión. Así que perdí la contribución de Alejandro. [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/16f550d176.html --]]

1 0

unsubscribe
by lupa＠inventati.org July 23, 2017

July 23, 2017

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: unsubscribe De: lupa(a)inventati.org Hola, Esta es la segunda vez en el año en que me suscribes. Ahora, estoy tratando de Cancelar mi suscripción pero el correo electrónico de confirmación no está llegando como el pasado febrero. DETENGA SPAM y DESCUBRA Gracias - Lupa --------------------------------- Diáspora*: https://diasp.org/u/lupa18 Riot / matrix: @ lupa18: matrix.org Telegrama: @ lupa18 ID de openPGP: 45ED76E0 Clave de openPGP: https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x58A5DBC345ED76E0 --------------------------------- Declaracion de Confidencialidad El contenido de este mensaje de correo electrónico y de sus archivos adjuntos está dirigido (s) exclusivamente a el (los) destinatario (s) del mismo. Si usted no es el destinatario indicado, o si este mensaje ha sido enviado por error, no se publicó en el sentido de no leer, divulgar, reproducir, distribuir, diseminar o usar este mensaje en forma alguna. Declaración de Confidencialidad El contenido de este mensaje de correo electrónico y sus anexos están destinados únicamente al (los) destinatario (s) de este documento. Si no es el destinatario designado, o si este mensaje le ha sido dirigido por error, se le ordena que no lea, divulgue, reproduzca, distribuya, divulgue o utilice de otra manera este correo electrónico. [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/29a21f1c11.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] IO recomienda .amazon reconsideration
by evanleibovitch＠gmail.com July 23, 2017

July 23, 2017

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: IO recomienda .amazon reconsideration De: evanleibovitch(a)gmail.com Maravilloso. Otro punto de fricción entre ICANN y el mundo Gobiernos. [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/5a832696ae.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] IO recomienda .amazon reconsideration
by lupa＠inventati.org July 23, 2017

July 23, 2017

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: IO recomienda .amazon reconsideration De: lupa(a)inventati.org DEJA DE HACER SPAM El 18/07/17 a las 11:15, Carlton Samuels escribió: > Adds to the kerfuffle surrounding geographic names in the DNS. > > http://domainnamewire.com/2017/07/18/amazon-com-gets-big-win-domain-battle-… > > > -Carlton > > ============================== > /Carlton A Samuels/ > /Mobile: 876-818-1799 > Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround/ > ============================= > > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-en mailing list > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en Lupa --------------------------------- Diáspora*: https://diasp.org/u/lupa18 Riot / matrix: @ lupa18: matrix.org Telegrama: @ lupa18 ID de openPGP: 45ED76E0 Clave de openPGP: https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x58A5DBC345ED76E0 --------------------------------- Declaracion de Confidencialidad El contenido de este mensaje de correo electrónico y de sus archivos adjuntos está dirigido (s) exclusivamente a el (los) destinatario (s) del mismo. Si usted no es el destinatario indicado, o si este mensaje ha sido enviado por error, no se publicó en el sentido de no leer, divulgar, reproducir, distribuir, diseminar o usar este mensaje en forma alguna. Declaración de Confidencialidad El contenido de este mensaje de correo electrónico y sus anexos están destinados únicamente al (los) destinatario (s) de este documento.Si no es el destinatario designado, o si este mensaje le ha sido dirigido por error, se le ordena que no lea, divulgue, reproduzca, distribuya, divulgue o utilice de otra manera este correo electrónico. [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/477de9660f.html --]]

1 0

Declaración Final Amazon vs. ICANN
by Humberto Carrasco July 23, 2017

July 23, 2017

Estimados todos, Quiero agradecer a Carlos Raúl Gutierrez por hacerme llegar la Declaración Final en el caso "Amazon versus ICANN. ( https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/irp-amazon-final-declaration-11… ) He preparado un resumen de la opinión mayoritaria porque es un tema de absoluta relevancia para le región. La traducción al español la hice yo, así que perdonen los errores. Saludos English Spanish Claimant Amazon EU S. a. r. l. (“Amazon”) seeks independent review of the decision of the Board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“ICANN”), acting through ICANN’s New gTLD Program Committee (“NGPC”), denying its applications for top-level domain names of .amazon and its IDN equivalents in Chinese and Japanese characters. Amazon contends that in making the decision to deny its applications, the NGPC acted in a manner that was inconsistent with and violated provisions of ICANN’s Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws and/or Applicant Guidebook for gTLD domain names (collectively, ICANN’s “governance documents”). ICANN contends, to the contrary, that at all times the NGPC acted consistently with ICANN’s governance documents. El Demandante Amazon EU S. a. R L ("Amazon") busca una revisión independiente de la decisión de la Junta Directiva de la Corporación de Internet para la Asignación de Nombres y Números ("ICANN"), actuando a través del Comité del Programa de Nuevos gTLD de la ICANN ("NGPC"), negando sus solicitudes para nombres de dominio de nivel superior de .amazon y sus equivalentes de IDN en sus caracteres chino y japoness. Amazon sostiene que al tomar la decisión de negar sus solicitudes, el NGPC actuó de una manera que era inconsistente con y violado disposiciones de los Estatutos de la ICANN, Reglamentos y / o Guía del Solicitante para nombres de dominio de gTLD (colectivamente, "documentos de gobierno" de ICANN). ICANN sostiene, al contrario, que en todo momento la NGPC actuó de manera consistente con los documentos de gobernanza. Conclusion Conclusión Based upon the foregoing, we declare that Amazon has established that ICANN’s Board, acting through the NGPC, acted in a manner inconsistent with ICANN’s Bylaws, as more fully described above. Further, the GAC, as a constituent body of ICANN, failed to allow the applicant to submit any information to the GAC and thus deprived the applicant of the minimal degree of procedural fairness before issuance of its advice, as required by the Bylaws. The failure by the GAC to accord procedural fairness diminishes the presumption that would otherwise attach to its consensus advice. Con base en lo anterior, declaramos que Amazon ha establecido que la Junta Directiva de ICANN, actuando a través de la NGPC, actuó de manera inconsistente con los Estatutos, como se describió con mayor detalle anteriormente. Además, el GAC, como órgano ICANN, no permitió que el solicitante presentara ninguna información al GAC y privó al solicitante del mínimo grado de equidad procesal antes de la emisión de su consejo, como lo requieren los Estatutos. La incapacidad del GAC de otorgar equidad procesal disminuye la presunción que de otro modo se uniría a su asesoramiento consensuado. The Panel recommends that the Board of ICANN promptly re-evaluate Amazon’s applications in light of the Panel’s declarations above. In its re-evaluation of the applications, the Board should make an objective and independent judgment regarding whether there are, in fact, well-founded, merits-based *public policy reasons* for denying Amazon’s applications. Further, if the Board determines that the applications should not proceed, the Board should explain its reasons supporting that decision. The GAC consensus advice, standing alone, cannot supplant the Board’s independent and objective decision with a reasoned analysis. If the Board determines that the applications should proceed, we understand that ICANN’s Bylaws, in effect, require the Board to “meet and confer” with the GAC. (See Bylaws, Article XI, § 2.1(j).) In light of our declaration, we recommend that ICANN do so within sixty (60) days of the issuance of this Final Declaration. As the Board is required to state reasons why it is not following the GAC consensus advice, we recommend the Board cite this Final Declaration and the reasons set forth herein. El Panel recomienda que la Junta Directiva de ICANN reevalúe prontamente las solicitudes de Amazon a la luz de las declaraciones del Panel hechas anteriormente. En su reevaluación de las solicitudes, la Junta debe emitir un juicio objetivo e independiente sobre si existen *razones de política pública* bien fundadas y basadas en méritos para negar las solicitudes de Amazon. Además, si la Junta determina que las solicitudes no son procedentes, la Junta debe explicar las razones que apoyen esa decisión. El asesoramiento consensuado del GAC, por sí solo, no puede suplantar la decisión independiente y objetiva de la Junta Directiva con un análisis razonado. Si la Junta Directiva determina que las solicitudes deben continuar, entendemos que los Estatutos de la ICANN, en efecto, requieren que la Junta Directiva "se reúna y confiera" con el GAC. (Ver Reglamentos, Artículo XI, § 2.1 (j)). A la luz de nuestra declaración, recomendamos que ICANN lo haga dentro de los sesenta (60) días de la emisión de esta Declaración Final. Como se requiere que la Junta Directiva explique por qué no sigue el consejo de consenso del GAC, recomendamos a la Junta Directiva que cite esta Declaración Final y las razones aquí expuestas.

9 15

Re: [lac-discuss-es] IO recomienda .amazon reconsideration
by rihogris＠gmail.com July 22, 2017

July 22, 2017

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: IO recomienda .amazon reconsideration De: rihogris(a)gmail.com Evan, Claro, es bloquear la mente cuando no todos los participantes están incluidos, y También estoy enterado, usted está trayendo en esta solución como fuera de la caja una, Como dice Alejandro. Por otra parte, podría funcionar, con gran esfuerzo de la sociedad civil, (Ya que hay grandes diferencias culturales entre todos nuestros países), pero Entonces, la situación política real de los países es la peor en el Último ... (Realmente no sé cuándo estos nueve países tienen un buen Relación desde el descubrimiento de Colón!). ¿Estarán todos de acuerdo en crear una (Preferible un multi-interesado uno) para manejar este .amazonas? Realmente no sé cómo resolver el problema de .amazon, y entiendo de Las soluciones de caja, seguramente encajará. mejor Ricardo Holmquist 2017-07-21 19:16 GMT-05: 00 Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch(a)gmail.com> : > I think we're getting caught up on the details, not the general concept. I > apologize for not being sufficiently inclusive, but do not wish that error > to obscure the broader point. > > If the original email had said nine countries instead of five, how would > your response have changed? What are the substantive objections? > > (And please note that I'm not advancing this as a perfect answer... just > suggesting it as a middle ground that both sides find somewhat sub-optimal, > but less painful than ongoing expensive battles.) > > -Evan > On Jul 21, 2017, at 17:19, Ricardo Holmquist <rihogris(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> I do not share the solution given, but further than that, it contains >> geographical mistakes, my country is not being included in the list of the >> five countries, because this person is supposing it only has to do with the >> river, and for us is also the forest, where we have about 25% of our >> territory. The State where the Amazon jungle is located is called Amazonas, >> and is not being included in the 3 countries with territories called >> Amazonas. >> >> Best >> >> Ricardo Holmquist >> ISOC Venezuela >> >> >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> Libre >> de virus. www.avast.com >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campai…> >> <#m_6266614077816008559_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> >> >> 2017-07-21 15:28 GMT-05:00 Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org>: >> >>> I read on a Facebook group, from Barry Shein, an imaginative and IMO >>> effective resolution to the .amazon issue. I offer it here with some >>> personal suggestions added regarding to 'what comes next': >>> >>> Amazon pays for the creation of the ".amazonas" TLD, and entrusts it to >>> a nonprofit whose stakeholders are exclusively from the five countries (Brazil, >>> Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia) through which the river runs. Such >>> stakeholders could be government, NGO or private. In return, the GAC >>> rescinds its objection to .amazon. >>> >>> (Alternatively, dot-amazonas could be entrusted to the three regional >>> governments -- in Peru, Colombia and Brazil -- that are named "Amazonas".) >>> >>> After all, "Amazonas" is the local name for the river in both Spanish >>> and Portuguese. Since elsewhere governments are turning to local names >>> rather than anglicized ones -- think Beijing, Iqaluit or Bengaluru -- >>> wouldn't this be a Good Thing and a reasonable answer to both the >>> governments and the bookstore? >>> >>> Such an offer would dull most of the logical objection to the >>> bookstore's desire for the name, while calling on the affected countries to >>> actually indicate what they would do with an appropriate TLD, or at least >>> to reserve it for future use. >>> >>> Would such a compromise be workable? Or would it cause a problem by >>> putting the current objectors on the spot regarding what they would do with >>> the TLD themselves? >>> >>> (Perhaps this re-opens a wider problem with geoTLD names, wondering if >>> every possible linguistic name for countries and regions are deserving of >>> protection. I mean, do we need to protect "Schweiz", "Suisse", "Svizzera", >>> "Svizra", "Helvetia" AND "Switzerland"?) >>> >>> - Evan >>> >>> >>> ______________________________ _________________ >>> lac-discuss-en mailing list >>> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >>> >>> >> [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/0b7a135475.html --]]

1 0