Amazon's Domain Name Troubles Threaten ICANN Program

, Corporate Counsel

   | 4 Comments

A recommendation made by a committee from ICANN, the nonprofit organization that coordinates Internet domains, to reject Amazon.com Inc.'s application for the generic top-level domain ".amazon" may end up undermining the largest-ever expansion of domains suffixes.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Tom Gilles

    Applications for New gTLDs were always subject to GAC advice and consideration of the public interest. That, is also in the Guidebook. That point aside, Amazon should be allowed to own their .amazon top level domain because the term is most closely associated with the giant internet retailer.

    The region in South America associated with the large river and geographical area is known locally, in the native language as 'Amazonas' which, is derived from an ancient Greek mythology. The Amazonas region and culture can apply for .AMAZONAS in the next round. Or, perhaps Brazil and Peru should give the word 'Amazon' back to the Greeks.

    What is not mentioned in this article though, is Amazon Inc.'s brazen tld applications for generic words, like .book, .shop, .fashion and scores of other common words for which Amazon intends to act as the sole owner of second level domains. That is, every single website address that ends with '.book' (and over 60 others) will lead directly and exclusively to Amazon products and services.

  • Jim Davies

    This looks like heavy handed lobbying by INTA and others with a vested interest. At best, this is an attempt to distort trademark law to the benefit of their clients. They seem to want ICANN to disregard the interests of everyone else and provide applicants (their clients) with the monopoly use of a Generic TLD of place names that should properly represent more than just one interested party.

    I know where Patagonia is - but have no idea who it is that your article refers to, who seem to think that they should have been given exclusive ownership of that domain. Domain names do not equate to trademarks. If this article is accurate, it reflects extraordinary arrogance by the trademark lobby.

  • Christopher Hofman

    I agree with you, Jim. Seems like the new gTLDs is an American issue, not a global issue. when we talk about if .patagonia or .amazon should be managed by US brands.
    While the whole application process was a huge administrative burden, it was rather risk free, as application fees were returned for rejected applications. This also means that out of the 1.900 applications there were many, which we knew from the start would just never happen.
    Ok, there will be dissappointed applicants such as Michelle Marsh, and some of them big players with a huge public say, but in the end we will still have hundreds of new top level domains, which will change (and enrich) the internet landscape.

  • Jim Davies

    This looks like heavy handed lobbying by INTA and others with a vested interest. At best, this is an attempt to distort trademark law to the benefit of their clients. They seem to want ICANN to disregard the interests of everyone else and provide applicants (their clients) with the monopoly use of a Generic TLD of place names that should properly represent more than just one interested party.

    I know where Patagonia is - but have no idea who it is that your article refers to, who seem to think that they should have been given exclusive ownership of that domain. Domain names do not equate to trademarks. If this article is accurate, it reflects extraordinary arrogance by the trademark lobby.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202614276487

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.