<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra">Hi Bruna,</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Bruna Santos <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bruna.mrtns@gmail.com" target="_blank">bruna.mrtns@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I have attached is the declaration document, and Id also like to point out the following items: <div><br></div><div>
<div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-page" title="Page 53">
<div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-layoutArea">
<div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-column">
<p><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><i>"126.<font color="#000000" style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)">We conclude that Amazon is the prevailing party in this matter. </font></i></font></p></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>and this is a good thing. ICANN's decision to kowtow to the GAC on this was shameful and did not follow it's own rules.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-page" title="Page 53"><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-layoutArea"><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-column"><p><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><i>Accordingly, pursuant
to Article IV, Section 3(18) of the Bylaws, Rule 11 of ICANN’s Supplementary
Procedures and Article 31 of the ICDR Rules, ICANN shall bear the costs of this IRP
as well as the cost of the IRP provider. The administrative fees and expenses of the
International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR) totaling US$5,750 shall be borne
by ICANN and the compensation and expenses of the Panelists totaling US$314,590.96
shall be borne by ICANN. Therefore, ICANN shall reimburse Amazon the sum of
US$163,045.51, representing that portion of said fees and expenses in excess of the
apportioned costs previously incurred by Amazon.</i></font></p><p><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><i>(...) </i></font></p><p>
</p><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-page" title="Page 66">
<div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-layoutArea">
<div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-column">
<p><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><i>151. Also, for the most part, Amazon’s conduct in pursuing its application was commendably reasonable. For example, <span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,0)">it explicitly agreed not to apply for gTLDs
with the names (or words) “Amazonas,” “Amazonia” and close variants thereof</span>. Such
a concrete effort at compromise should not be ignored or taken for granted."</i></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div><p>I still find it difficult not to see 'amazon' as a close variant to<span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"> <i style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">“Amazonas” or “Amazonia”. </i></span></p></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Umm, they applied for .amazon, the above was an attempt to make nice with the GAC. It was a good effort "<i style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">commendably reasonable" </i><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">for sure.</span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">Regards,</span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">McTim</span></div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-page" title="Page 53"><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-layoutArea"><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-column">
</div>
</div>
</div></div><div class="gmail_extra">Best, </div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Bruna </div><div class="gmail_extra"><div><div class="gmail-h5"><br><div class="gmail_quote">2017-07-18 13:06 GMT-03:00 Malisa Richards <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:malisarichards25.2008@gmail.com" target="_blank">malisarichards25.2008@gmail.<wbr>com</a>></span>:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-HOEnZb"><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-h5"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px"><span style="box-sizing:border-box;font-weight:700">Independent review process recommends ICANN reconsider .amazon top level domain name application.</span></p><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px"><img class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-m_-1794003103838395491m_7756480976330631372gmail-alignright gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-m_-1794003103838395491m_7756480976330631372gmail-size-full gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-m_-1794003103838395491m_7756480976330631372gmail-wp-image-27156" src="http://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/amazon-logo-2.jpg" alt="" width="275" height="55" style="box-sizing: border-box; border: 0px; max-width: 100%; height: auto; float: right; text-align: right; margin: 0px 0px 24px 24px;">One of the biggest controversies in ICANN’s new top level domain name program has been the denial of Amazon.com’s applications for the .Amazon top level domain as well as the Chinese and Japanese equivalents.</p><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px">Amazon.com was one of the largest applicants for new domain names, but its .brand strategy was thrown into disarray when when governments opposed its .amazon application.</p><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px">This was bad for the new TLD programs supporters, as any use of .Amazon by the internet giant would drastically increase awareness of alternative endings to the right of the dot in domain names. Amazon has created some sites on its other .brand domains, such as .AWS. But a major push on .Amazon would raise the bar.</p><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px">On the surface, there was nothing in the new top level domain applicant guidebook that disallowed the company from getting .amazon. Notably, it wasn’t on a list of protected geographic names.</p><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px">But the governments of Brazil and Peru, which are among the countries along the Amazon river, filed an early warning notice about the domain. They had concerns that Amazon.com getting the domain name would somehow hurt the people of the Amazon. <a href="http://domainnamewire.com/2013/12/10/hardheaded-governments-vs-amazon-com/" style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(38,162,208);background-position:0px 0px" target="_blank">It was perplexing</a>.</p><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px">Yet, they were able to convince the ICANN Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) to issue consensus advice objecting to the issuance of the .amazon domain. (A community objection filed by the independent objector was denied.)</p><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px">The GAC advice didn’t come with much of a rationale. Nevertheless, ICANN’s board gave deference to the advice and denied Amazon.com’s applications for the three domains.</p><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px">Amazon filed for Independent Review and just got a <a href="http://domainnamewire.com/2013/12/10/hardheaded-governments-vs-amazon-com/" style="box-sizing:border-box;color:rgb(38,162,208);background-position:0px 0px" target="_blank">big win</a> (pdf). The panel determined that ICANN’s board gave too much deference to the GAC and that it should reconsider its decision.</p><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px">The panel:</p><blockquote style="box-sizing:border-box;font-style:italic;margin:40px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px"><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px">…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….The GAC consensus advice, standing alone, cannot supplant the Board’s independent and objective decision with a reasoned analysis.</p></blockquote><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px">Following the decision, an Amazon.com spokesperson issued this statement to Domain Name Wire:</p><p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px 0px 28px;padding:0px;color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:"Open Sans",sans-serif;font-size:16px">“We look forward to the ICANN Board re-evaluating our application for the .AMAZON top level domain so that we may develop new experiences and innovations on behalf of our customers.”</p><div><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail-m_-1794003103838395491m_7756480976330631372gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><b><i><br></i></b></div><div><div style="color:rgb(0,0,255);font-family:courier,monaco,monospace,sans-serif;font-size:medium;font-weight:bold"><span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:"Times New Roman";font-weight:normal"><font face="'lucida console', sans-serif"><font size="3"><span style="font-family:courier,monaco,monospace,sans-serif"><font color="#0000ff"><b><hr></b></font></span></font></font></span></div><font color="#0000ff" size="3" face="monospace, monospace"><b>Best Regards,</b></font></div><div><font color="#0000ff" size="3" face="monospace, monospace"><b><br></b></font></div><div><font color="#0000ff" size="3" face="monospace, monospace"><b><br></b></font></div><div><font color="#0000ff" size="3" face="monospace, monospace"><b>Bertnell A. Malisa Richards </b></font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div></div></div><span class="gmail-HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">-- <br><div class="gmail-m_4049399887283029184gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><b><i>Bruna Martins dos Santos </i></b></div><div><br></div><div><div><a href="tel:+55%2061%2099252-6512" value="+5561992526512" target="_blank">+55 61 99252-6512</a></div><div>Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos<br></div><div>@boomartins<br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</font></span></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">Cheers,<br><br>McTim<br>"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel</div>
</div></div>