Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday October 09 2017, @08:38PM   Printer-friendly
from the why-check-the-file-system? dept.

In an effort to block Amazon from getting the top-level domain .amazon, Brazil may have put governments on a crash course with the private sector over control of the web.

In an aggressive and contradictory letter [PDF] on Wednesday to the overseer of the internet's domain name system, ICANN, Brazilian technology minister Benedicto Filho insisted the US non-profit not approve the creation of .amazon, and states strongly that governments have the final say on what should appear online.

As you may well know, Brazil is particularly enamored with the word Amazon, being the home of the Amazon Jungle. And it doesn't want some moneybags American retailer nabbing the top-level domain for the rainforest.

"It is the right and duty of governments – and not of Amazon the company, nor any panel constituted by three nationals of a single country in their individual capacity, nor even of the ICANN Board of Directors – to identify the public policy issues that may justify the Board to adopt certain decisions," Filho said.

He goes on to say that if ICANN was "required to substitute the views of governments and the GAC [Governmental Advisory Committee] for its own judgments ... it would be dealing a fatal blow to the multi-stakeholder governance model upon which ICANN is based."

In essence, Brazil says that unless ICANN does what it says – in this case not allow for the creation of the .amazon top-level domain for Jeff Bezos' Amazon – then the entire model of internet governance that the organization represents, where all parties including governments, the technical community and business have an equal say, is invalid.

That extraordinary contradiction – that an equitable decision-making process only exists so long as governments have the final say – is not the only one in the letter.

Filho goes on to insist that all governments agree with Brazil and Peru's position that .amazon not be added to the internet, but in making his case only cites meetings held in Brazil by Brazilian interests.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/27/brazil_dot_amazon_gtld/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @05:37AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @05:37AM (#579653)

    On possible downside is that domains would be distributed first come, first serve (of course using some sort of proof work to avoid spam claiming). Microsoft would probably not be thrilled to end up with Microsoft17264 as their domain. On the other hand what serves the public good and what serves commercial interests often do not align. Even though today we nearly always yield to the latter, I see no reason it should not be the reverse. Commercial interests will thrive whether or not they are pandered to. Might this be inconvenient to Microsoft? Sure. Would it drive them out of business? Obviously no. In any case the current system is not that much better here. Tumblr, Twitter, and all of these sites do just fine with absurd names that were no doubt in part driven by the fact that near every 'normal' name is being squatted.