I am a Brazilian (not that it is important) and I wished Amazon had .amazon (but made it available for others to use it too) without state actors influence.
Please do not use derogatory terms like this, it poisons discourse.
There is absolutely no reason why they should be given rights on .amazon, a foreign word that doesn't exist in their own language.
Note also that it is a well-established standard for TLDs to use English - e.g. .fi instead of .su.
.рф (Russia) 900000+ domains, .台灣 (Taiwan) 500000+ domains, .中国 (China) 200000+ domains, etc.
See also .tp (Timor Português), .cs (Československo), .dd (Deutsche Demokratische Republik), .de (Deutschland), .rs (Republika Srbija), etc for examples using the latin alphabet.
If only there was a way as a society we could make sure common resources could be used by interested and relevant parties in an agreeable manner. Maybe some kind of group that is formed based on the input of many people and will represent their interests in this matter and others like it. If only.
Also it's really silly for one private company to own an entire TLD just because that company choose to use a generic, commonly used word. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
ge·ner·ic
characteristic of or relating to a class or group of things; not specific.
Does anyone really say "I'm going to Amazon"?
People going to cashless stores in Seattle?
Because that's what your example heavily implies, based on the grammar and syntax (given your capitalization of the word amazon) of your example. I hope you're not doing that. Because that'd be ridiculous.
When speaking of the river people are far more likely to use "Amazonas" than "Amazon".
You obviously think that based on your example as completely ridiculous as it is, and arguably this is very false and only works in the context of the U.S. market, but it's actually completely irrelevant. Amazon, a U.S. based private company that won't be around forever (hopefully not), doesn't get to have wholesale ownership of the .TLD because it named itself after a word used to describe various geographic and cultural entities.
That very obviously, rightfully, and justifiably belongs to groups and organizations who have a vested interest on all things "amazon." Not the private, ephemeral company that named itself after these geographic, cultural "things."
Amazon owns the trademark. Trademarks only work in the context of markets governed by some set of economic laws and treaties. They do not own the word. This is an absurd conversation to be having, and yet-another-example of why brand TLD's were such a bad idea. ICANN is not in the business of trademarks and it shouldn't be. Brand TLD's are a kind of uber trademark because of how TLD's are structured. It's such a bad idea. Apple the company currently has .apple. A global fruit cultivated over millennia. But somehow Apple the tech company gets it.
Most people in Europe will associate "amazon" with the company, as will most Indians and increasingly the rest of Asia too.
People in South America usually don't refer to the rainforest or the river as "amazon".
Where are the people who think of amazon as the rainforest or the river?
>They do not own the word
Of course they don't, but they've got a very legitimate claim to own the TLD.
>Apple the company currently has .apple. A global fruit cultivated over millennia. But somehow Apple the tech company gets it.
So what? Nobody else wanted that TLD, why shouldn't Apple get it? This is a really strange thing to complain about.
Why does the Verisign get .net? A tool used globally to catch fish, birds and other animals for a millenia.
Not really. Once trademarks become "things", that trademark ceases to be effective and can rarely be enforced. TLD's are not for trademarks. This isn't complicated.
> A tool used globally to catch fish, birds and other animals for a millenia.
Because .net, like .com, is shorthand. ".net" is short hand for network. And Verisign is the organization responsible for maintaining that TLD's domain registry. It has nothing to do with branding or trademarks.
>A tool used globally to catch fish, birds and other animals for a millenia.
This should be your sign that you're just grasping at straws and you're not here to learn or make any kind of substantial argument.
Your rebuttal is the equivalent to pointing out a grammar mistake.
It most definitely does. Because TLDs are designed to be at the top, because they are top level domains, used to house other domains in a general category. .net does not belong to a brand, it is a broad concept. So it correctly sits at the top. Other people are also able to freely register domains under that TLD.
That's a far cry from one private company owning a TLD with broad applications, just to continue to carry out its niche commercial purpose.
>Your rebuttal is the equivalent to pointing out a grammar mistake.
No it's correctly pointing out how categories work combined with the most basic of reading comprehension abilities. This is really really elementary stuff.
Amazon (the company) has a very (probably the most) legitimate claim to the gTLD as the word is most often used to refer to the company. I'm not really sure that there's any need to bring trademarks into this.
>This should be your sign that you're just grasping at straws and you're not here to learn or make any kind of substantial argument.
It's literally the exact argument you made. I suppose this would mean that you're also grasping at straws, maybe we should start some kind of a club?
No it isn't. What plane of confusion are you on?
I literally tried to describe this with shapes and you couldn't grasp it apparently.
Your .apple example was pretty silly, nobody else wanted that TLD. Why should Apple not get to have it if they’re the only ones who want to pay a fuckload of money for it?
https://www.worldwildlife.org/places/amazon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_rainforest
>"The Amazon" and "Amazonia" redirect here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/amazon
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/amazon
https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-jeff-bezos-chose-comp...
>Bezos thought the name of earth's largest river was perfect because he was building earth's largest bookstore
First, why would you get to decide whether Amazon.com is "enough", and what does enough even mean here?
Second, Amazon would never host their portal on amazon.amazon, it would be ridiculous. They would want www.amazon, which seems fine, or most probably shop.amazon, books.amazon, free.amazon, etc. all of which are completely in their prerogative.
Maybe Amazonians can get authority on .br.amazon, .forest.amazon, .region.amazon, or something but nothing on the top domain. It would be ridiculous for many reasons including security.