{"id":1236,"date":"2019-11-04T13:17:45","date_gmt":"2019-11-04T16:17:45","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/?p=1236"},"modified":"2021-11-02T12:22:56","modified_gmt":"2021-11-02T15:22:56","slug":"caso-amazon-x-amazonia-embaixador-achilles-faz-pronunciamento-durante-a-icann66-em-montreal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/caso-amazon-x-amazonia-embaixador-achilles-faz-pronunciamento-durante-a-icann66-em-montreal\/","title":{"rendered":"Caso Amazon x Amaz\u00f4nia: Embaixador Achilles faz pronunciamento durante a ICANN66 em Montreal"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"fb-root\"><\/div>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"Entrevista com o Embaixador Achilles, na ICANN66 em Montreal\" width=\"1080\" height=\"608\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/Guram0fx52k?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>Durante a ICANN 66, que esta sendo realizada em Montreal, no Canad\u00e1, o Embaixador Achilles Emilio Zaluar Neto fez um pronunciamento acerca da disputa entre o dom\u00ednio .amazon, utilizada pela gigante do varejo Amazon, com os pa\u00edses integrantes da OTCA (Organiza\u00e7\u00e3o do Tratado de Coopera\u00e7\u00e3o Amaz\u00f4nica), formada por Brasil, Col\u00f4mbia, Equador, Bol\u00edvia, Guiana, Peru, Suriname e Venezuela.<\/p>\n<p>Abaixo pronunciamento realizado neste domingo, dia 03 de novembro.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><strong>===============<\/strong><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: left;\">Caros colegas, procurarei ser o mais breve poss\u00edvel e me concentrarei nas quest\u00f5es mais importantes e no desenrolar recente que pode n\u00e3o ser do conhecimento geral. No entanto, pe\u00e7o a paci\u00eancia de todos, pois esta \u00e9 a \u00fanica ocasi\u00e3o em que temos para destacar uma quest\u00e3o importante para n\u00f3s.<\/p>\n<p>Para maiores detalhes t\u00e9cnicos da disputa, eu indicaria o documento \u00fatil chamado \u00abAMAZON update\u00bb, preparado pela secretaria, que se encontra dispon\u00edvel na p\u00e1gina do GAC e que foi revisado por Laurent agora.<\/p>\n<p>Para os interessados em estudar em detalhes a posi\u00e7\u00e3o do Brasil, eu indicaria que lessem coment\u00e1rios nas p\u00e1ginas <em>Specification 13<\/em> e <em>Application Comments<\/em> no site da ICANN. N\u00e3o \u00e9 muito f\u00e1cil para um leigo encontr\u00e1-los, mas a secretaria \u00e9 muito prestativo e os ajudar\u00e1, se necess\u00e1rio. Tamb\u00e9m recomendo que leiam os coment\u00e1rios da OTCA, Equador, Col\u00f4mbia, Peru e outros pa\u00edses da Amaz\u00f4nia, bem como os do p\u00fablico em geral. Muitos de voc\u00eas s\u00e3o profissionais experientes. N\u00e3o necessitar\u00e3o de mais de trinta minutos para encontrar as p\u00e1ginas.<\/p>\n<p>Para resumir a hist\u00f3ria, a corpora\u00e7\u00e3o Amazon, uma das maiores empresas privadas do mundo, um dos cinco maiores gigantes da Internet, \u00e0s vezes chamados de &#8220;GAFA&#8221; ou &#8220;GAFAM&#8221;, com receita anual no valor de US $ 200 bilh\u00f5es d\u00f3lares, entrou com uma solicita\u00e7\u00e3o de cria\u00e7\u00e3o de um gTLD .amazon em 2012.<\/p>\n<p>Os pa\u00edses da regi\u00e3o amaz\u00f4nica naturalmente se opuseram \u00e0 solicita\u00e7\u00e3o Uma coisa \u00e9 registrar um nome geogr\u00e1fico como marca comercial: isso acontece o tempo todo e respeita a ordem cronol\u00f3gica de solicita\u00e7\u00e3o. Outra coisa totalmente diferente \u00e9 o ato de reivindicar exclusividade do nome de um continente inteiro no ciberespa\u00e7o sem o consentimento dos povos locais que teriam uma reivindica\u00e7\u00e3o relevante sobre ele.<\/p>\n<p>Em outras palavras, o amazon.com estava bem, ningu\u00e9m reclamara e, de acordo com os balan\u00e7os, a empresa prosperou com todo suporte de seu site. Mas .amazon seria uma coisa diferente, mais semelhante a um TLD de um pa\u00eds. Os pa\u00edses amaz\u00f4nicos corriam o risco de ter sua identidade confiscada em rela\u00e7\u00e3o ao ciberespa\u00e7o.<\/p>\n<p>N\u00e3o farei maiores refer\u00eancias \u00e0s regras ou estatutos quanto a essas solicita\u00e7\u00f5es. H\u00e1 muita controv\u00e9rsia sobre o tema e isso causou algumas discuss\u00f5es acaloradas na Word Track 5, que impediram que se chegasse a um consenso e levaram \u00e0 manuten\u00e7\u00e3o do status quo, como acabamos de ouvir na sess\u00e3o anterior. Em termos gerais, eles dizem que, no caso de regi\u00f5es e afins, um consenso ente as comunidades e governos afetados deve ser alcan\u00e7ado antes que seja concedido um gTLD . Em 2013, o GAC reconheceu as preocupa\u00e7\u00f5es dos pa\u00edses amaz\u00f4nicos e recomendou que n\u00e3o se desse prosseguimento \u00e0 solicita\u00e7\u00e3o. Esse \u00e9 o &#8220;parecer de Durban&#8221; da ICANN 47. Em 2014, a diretoria da ICANN aceitou o conselho de Durban e negou a solicita\u00e7\u00e3o.<\/p>\n<p>Caso encerrado, ou assim parecia. N\u00e3o se pode dizer que a empresa tenha sofrido. Suas linhas de neg\u00f3cios, todas baseadas na internet, continuaram a prosperar.<\/p>\n<p>Em 2015, a empresa apresentou uma proposta aos pa\u00edses da OTCA para compartilhar o uso e a administra\u00e7\u00e3o do gTLD. Levando em conta o que aconteceu posteriormente, talvez dev\u00eassemos ter aceito. Mas, como se costuma dizer, a vis\u00e3o retrospectiva \u00e9 sempre 20\/20. O Conselho negou a inscri\u00e7\u00e3o da empresa, ent\u00e3o os pa\u00edses amaz\u00f4nicos na \u00e9poca pensaram que o assunto estava encerrado.<\/p>\n<p>Mas em 2016 a empresa abriu o chamado processo de revis\u00e3o independente, um IRP, que \u00e9 basicamente uma esp\u00e9cie de painel de arbitragem sob a lei dos EUA. Em 2017, o IRP solicitou ao Conselho que avaliasse novamente a inscri\u00e7\u00e3o da empresa. Portanto, a pergunta, que fora encerrada por tr\u00eas anos &#8211; de 2014 a 2017 &#8211; foi reaberta.<\/p>\n<p>Digo isso porque alguns dizem que o procedimento est\u00e1 demorando muito, mas n\u00e3o \u00e9 assim. Houve um procedimento que durou dois anos, de 2012 a 2014, e levou a um resultado. Mas algumas pessoas n\u00e3o gostaram do resultado, ent\u00e3o reabriram o processo em 2017, e \u00e9 a\u00ed que estamos.<\/p>\n<p>Em 2017, o GAC reagiu a essa situa\u00e7\u00e3o n\u00e3o revogando o \u00abparecer de Durban\u00bb, que ainda \u00e9 v\u00e1lido, mas sublinhando a necessidade de encontrar uma solu\u00e7\u00e3o mutuamente aceit\u00e1vel antes da concess\u00e3o do aplicativo. Est\u00e1vamos bem com isso desde o in\u00edcio. Se as comunidades, governos e pa\u00edses concordam com a inscri\u00e7\u00e3o, por que n\u00e3o? Esse \u00e9 o &#8220;parecer de Abu Dhabi&#8221; da ICANN 63.<\/p>\n<p>Portanto, a Diretoria encarregou a corpora\u00e7\u00e3o da ICANN de tentar mediar algum tipo de consenso. A empresa, no entanto, n\u00e3o voltou \u00e0 sua proposta de 2015 de compartilhar responsabilidades pelo gTLD. Sua nova proposta era muito mais dura. Essencialmente, eles operariam o .amazon como entenderem e ofereceriam algumas concess\u00f5es de token para nos ajudar a salvar a cara. Algo parece ter mudado, de 2013 para 2017, no equil\u00edbrio de poder no ciberespa\u00e7o.<\/p>\n<p>Os pa\u00edses amaz\u00f4nicos e a OTCA ficaram chocados com esse desenvolvimento. Uma pergunta que parecia resolvida ressurgiu dos mortos. Lembremos, n\u00e3o estamos falando sobre a \u00abcomunidade da Internet\u00bb aqui. Esses eram funcion\u00e1rios do governo e cidad\u00e3os simples, n\u00e3o especialistas em internet, que nem sabem ao certo o que \u00e9 ICANN.<\/p>\n<p>Falo por experi\u00eancia: tendo chegado \u00e0 quest\u00e3o em janeiro deste ano, demorei um pouco para entender que a ICANN \u00e9 uma corpora\u00e7\u00e3o sem fins lucrativos obedecendo as leis do maravilhoso estado da Calif\u00f3rnia. Explicar aos meus superiores, jornalistas e congressistas que esse \u00f3rg\u00e3o poderia dispor do nome da regi\u00e3o amaz\u00f4nica como entenderem, sob suas pr\u00f3prias regras, sem o nosso consentimento, n\u00e3o era uma quest\u00e3o simples.<\/p>\n<p>Demorou um pouco &#8211; eu diria que todo o ano de 2018 &#8211; para chegar a um acordo com esse desenvolvimento. Inicialmente, alguns pa\u00edses da Amaz\u00f4nia n\u00e3o queriam negociar o que vimos como nosso direito de nascen\u00e7a. Por esse motivo e outros, os esfor\u00e7os de media\u00e7\u00e3o, como eram, n\u00e3o decolaram.<\/p>\n<p>No in\u00edcio de 2019, neste mesmo ano, ocorreu-nos que, se n\u00e3o negoci\u00e1ssemos, perder\u00edamos tudo. Poder\u00edamos reclamar, fazer discursos, mas ainda assim o perder\u00edamos. Ent\u00e3o come\u00e7amos a trabalhar em uma contraproposta da OTCA, a qual poder\u00edamos usar como base para negocia\u00e7\u00f5es com a empresa. Quando est\u00e1vamos come\u00e7ando, a crise venezuelana eclodiu e dificultou o di\u00e1logo entre os pa\u00edses amaz\u00f4nicos. N\u00e3o pelo conte\u00fado &#8211; todos concordamos sobre nossos direitos &#8211; mas porque discutir t\u00e1ticas de negocia\u00e7\u00e3o se torna dif\u00edcil, considerando o contexto pol\u00edtico geral.<\/p>\n<p>Permitam-me dizer que talvez algumas pessoas pensassem que nunca poder\u00edamos apresentar uma proposta substantiva conjunta da OTCA. Essa incapacidade pode ent\u00e3o ser usada como uma desculpa para interromper a negocia\u00e7\u00e3o e conceder o pedido nos termos da empresa.<\/p>\n<p>No entanto, milagre de milagres, com a ajuda da nova Secret\u00e1ria-Geral da OTCA, uma jovem e brilhante dama boliviana &#8211; eu gostaria que ela estivesse aqui &#8211; conseguimos uma contraproposta conjunta de que todos os pa\u00edses da Amaz\u00f4nia, da Bol\u00edvia ao Brasil, de Venezuela \u00e0 Col\u00f4mbia, do Peru ao Equador, da Guiana ao Suriname, endossaram e apresentaram. Isso foi em abril passado, pouco antes da ICANN 64, em Kobe.<\/p>\n<p>A proposta da OTCA \u00e9 equilibrada. Ele n\u00e3o impede a capacidade da empresa de explorar o gTLD .amazon para suas atividades de varejo e outras atividades comerciais, exceto quando isso causaria confus\u00e3o entre o p\u00fablico, por exemplo, vinculando o dom\u00ednio amazon a nomes t\u00edpicos da cultura amaz\u00f4nica, geografia, patrim\u00f4nio e afins. Com isso, quero dizer que os nomes das cidades, rios, cerim\u00f4nias e mitos religiosos ou folcl\u00f3ricos, ervas medicinais, animais t\u00edpicos e outros, seriam protegidos. Por exemplo, solimoes.amazon ou manaus.amazon &#8211; Solim\u00f5es \u00e9 o nome dado \u00e0 parte superior do rio Amazonas. Manaus \u00e9 a capital do estado do Amazonas &#8211; n\u00e3o poderia ser usado. Mas a empresa ainda n\u00e3o concordou com isso.<\/p>\n<p>De acordo com a proposta da OTCA, compartilhar\u00edamos a responsabilidade &#8211; a empresa, de um lado, a OTCA e as oito na\u00e7\u00f5es da Amaz\u00f4nia, por outro &#8211; de discutir e resolver quaisquer diverg\u00eancias de maneira r\u00e1pida e justa. Todos os detalhes podem ser negociados para satisfa\u00e7\u00e3o de todos. Sublinho que a proposta da OTCA de 2019 foi consideravelmente menos vantajosa para o nosso lado do que a proposta de 2015 da pr\u00f3pria empresa, que mostra at\u00e9 que ponto est\u00e1vamos preparados para buscar uma solu\u00e7\u00e3o acordada, conforme exigido pelo conselho de Abu Dhabi.<\/p>\n<p>Os primeiros passos da negocia\u00e7\u00e3o foram promissores. Ao lidar diretamente com a empresa, em consultas informais nas quais participei pessoalmente (sempre relatando de volta aos Estados membros da OTCA e da pr\u00f3pria institui\u00e7\u00e3o OTCA, que receberam uma c\u00f3pia de cada e-mail que foi trocado), pudemos ver as linhas de um poss\u00edvel compromisso.<\/p>\n<p>Por isso, foi com choque inusitado que n\u00f3s, pa\u00edses amaz\u00f4nicos, descobrimos que as negocia\u00e7\u00f5es foram interrompidas unilateralmente pelo outro lado, em maio passado, logo antes da ICANN 65 em Marraquesh . Fomos informados de que havia uma grande pressa em concluir a quest\u00e3o antes de Marraquesh, e nenhum atraso adicional seria tolerado; portanto, as negocia\u00e7\u00f5es foram interrompidas. A proposta da empresa seria o Compromisso de Interesse P\u00fablico final, ou PIC; nenhum compromisso ou f\u00f3rmula intermedi\u00e1ria com a contraproposta da OTCA seria previsto pelo Conselho.<\/p>\n<p>No entanto, aqui estamos, na ICANN 66 em Montreal, em novembro, e o problema ainda est\u00e1 em aberto. Aparentemente, n\u00e3o havia tanta pressa. Ent\u00e3o, por que as negocia\u00e7\u00f5es foram interrompidas em maio passado? Por que perdemos o tempo entre maio e novembro, quando os pa\u00edses amaz\u00f4nicos e a OTCA estavam prontos e dispostos a negociar? Talvez quando voc\u00ea tem certeza da senten\u00e7a do juiz a seu favor, houvesse menos \u00edmpeto para chegar a um acordo com o outro lado. A ICANN poderia ter desempenhado um papel construtivo aqui.<\/p>\n<p>Caros colegas, isso n\u00e3o \u00e9 compat\u00edvel nem com o parecer de Durban, nem com o parecer de Abu Dhabi. Nenhum observador imparcial concluiria que os conselhos do GAC foram seguidos neste caso importante e precedente.<\/p>\n<p>Por isso, pedimos ao GAC que solicite \u00e0 Diretoria da ICANN que designe um mediador profissional independente para facilitar o reatamento das negocia\u00e7\u00f5es entre a OTCA e seus Estados membros, por um lado, e a empresa, por outro. O mediador poderia ter o poder de buscar os pontos de vista das comunidades locais da Amaz\u00f4nia, bem como da comunidade da Internet, trazendo a sociedade civil para a sala de negocia\u00e7\u00f5es.<\/p>\n<p>Essa medida seria essencial se a ICANN seguir os conselhos de Abu Dhabi, segundo os quais \u00e9 necess\u00e1rio encontrar uma solu\u00e7\u00e3o mutuamente aceit\u00e1vel para a inscri\u00e7\u00e3o da .amazon. Se o Conselho n\u00e3o concordar com isso, deve explicar por escrito o porqu\u00ea decidiu n\u00e3o seguir os conselhos de Abu Dhabi.<\/p>\n<p>Receio que isso n\u00e3o seja um precedente ruim e reflita mal o estado atual da governan\u00e7a da Internet, inclusive sobre sua capacidade de estabelecer um equil\u00edbrio entre interesses privados e preocupa\u00e7\u00f5es de pol\u00edticas p\u00fablicas. No caso .amazon, os interesses privados de uma corpora\u00e7\u00e3o teriam permiss\u00e3o para discutir as preocupa\u00e7\u00f5es e o patrim\u00f4nio cultural de oito na\u00e7\u00f5es e dezenas de milh\u00f5es de pessoas. Devemos refletir sobre isso na pr\u00f3xima reuni\u00e3o do IGF daqui a duas semanas, em Berlim.<\/p>\n<p>Ainda achamos que um acordo em que todos saem ganhando, que proporcionar\u00e1 um impulso positivo para a governan\u00e7a da Internet, em vez de desacredit\u00e1-la. N\u00e3o \u00e9 tarde demais.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter wp-image-1242 size-full\" src=\"http:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/4bade14f-e248-4c6b-94de-4f810e0b40db-1.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"600\" height=\"223\" srcset=\"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/4bade14f-e248-4c6b-94de-4f810e0b40db-1.jpg 600w, https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/4bade14f-e248-4c6b-94de-4f810e0b40db-1-300x112.jpg 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px\" \/><\/p>\n<p><strong>TEXTO ORIGINAL ===============================<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Brazil\u2019s presentation to the GAC on the .amazon issue<\/p>\n<p>ICANN 66 &#8211; Montreal &#8211; Rev 1<\/p>\n<p>Dear colleagues, I\u2019ll seek to be as brief as possible, and to concentrate on the most essential issues and on those recent developments that may not be of general knowledge. However, I ask for your patience, for this is the only occasion we have to highlight an issue that is important for us. For many of the technical details of the dispute, I would refer to the useful document called \u00ab\u00a0.AMAZON update\u00a0\u00bb, prepared by the secretariat, available at the GAC webpage and reviewed by Laurent just now.<\/p>\n<p>For those interested to study in detail Brazil\u2019s position, I would direct you to our comments on the Specification 13 and Application Comments pages in the ICANN website. It is not very easy for a layperson to actually find these, but the secretariat is very helpful and will assist you if need. I also recommend you read there the comments by ACTO, Ecuador, Colombia, Peru and other Amazon countries, as well as those by the general public. Most of you are experienced professionals. It will take you no more than 30 minutes of work to find the pages.<\/p>\n<p>To make a long story short, the Amazon corporation, one of the largest private companies in the world, one of the top-5 Internet giants sometimes referred to as \u00ab\u00a0GAFA\u00a0\u00bb or \u00ab\u00a0GAFAM\u00a0\u00bb , with anual revenues north of U$ 200 billion dollars, applied for the .amazon gTLD in 2012.<\/p>\n<p>Countries in the Amazon region naturally objected to it. It is one thing to register a geographical name as a trademark: this happens all the time on a first come, first served basis. It is another, totally different thing for someone to lay exclusive claim to a whole continent of cyberspace, without the agreement of the indigenous peoples who would have a relevant claim to it.<\/p>\n<p>In other words, amazon.com was fine, nobody complained about it, and by all accounts the company thrived on the back of its website. But .amazon would be a different thing, more similar to a country TLD. Amazon nations were at risk of having their identity confiscated as regards cyberspace.<\/p>\n<p>I\u2019m not going to go back on the rules or bylaws for such applications. There is a lot of controversy about them and this caused some heated arguments in Work Track 5 which blocked consensus and led to the maintenance of the status quo, as we just heard in the previous session. In general terms, they say that in the case of regions and such, the consent of the affected communities and governments should be achieved before a gTLD is granted. In 2013, GAC acknowledged Amazon countries\u2019 concerns and recommended that the application do not proceed. That\u2019s the \u00ab\u00a0Durban advice\u00a0\u00bb of ICANN 47. In 2014, the ICANN Board accepted the Durban advice and denied the application.<\/p>\n<p>Case closed, or so it seemed. The company may hardly be said to have suffered. Its lines of business, all based on the internet, continued to thrive.<\/p>\n<p>In 2015, the company presented a proposal to ACTO countries for sharing the use and administration of the gTLD. Taking into account what happened later, maybe we should have taken it. But as they say, hindsight is always 20\/20. The Board had denied the company&#8217;s application, so Amazon countries at the time thought the matter was closed.<\/p>\n<p>But in 2016 the company opened what is called an \u00ab\u00a0Independent Review Process\u00a0\u00bb, an IRP, which is basically a kind of arbitration panel under US law. In 2017, the IRP asked the Board to evaluate again the company\u2019s application. So the question, which had been closed for three years &#8211; from 2014 to 2017 &#8211; was re-opened.<\/p>\n<p>I say this because some say that the procedure is taking a long time, but that is not so. There was a procedure that lasted two years, from 2012 to 2014, and it led to a result. But some people didn\u2019t like the result, so they reopened the process in 2017, and that\u2019s where we are.<\/p>\n<p>In 2017, GAC reacted to this situation not by repealing the \u00ab\u00a0Durban advice\u00a0\u00bb, which is therefore still valid, but by underlining the need for a mutually acceptable solution to be found before the application is granted. We were all OK with that, since the beginning. If the communities and governments and countries agree with the application, why not. That\u2019s the \u00ab\u00a0Abu Dhabi advice\u00a0\u00bb of ICANN 63.<\/p>\n<p>So the Board tasked the ICANN corporation to try and mediate some kind of consensus. The company, however, did not come back to its 2015 proposal for sharing responsibility for the gTLD. Its new proposal was much harsher. Essentially, they would run .amazon as they see fit and would offer some token concessions to help us save face. Something seems to have changed, from 2013 to 2017, in the balance of power in cyberspace.<\/p>\n<p>Amazon countries and ACTO were shocked at this development. A question that seemed settled came back from the dead. Mind you, we are not talking about the \u00ab\u00a0internet community\u00a0\u00bb here. These were government officials and simple citizens, not internet specialists, who do not even know for sure what is ICANN.<\/p>\n<p>I speak from experience: having come to the question in January this year, it took me a while to understand that ICANN is a non-profit corporation under the law of the wonderful state of California. To explain to my superiors, journalists and Congressmen that such a body could dispose of the name of the Amazonian region as they see fit, under their own rules, without our consent, was no simple matter.<\/p>\n<p>It took us a while &#8211; I would say the whole year of 2018 &#8211; to come to terms with this development. Initially, some Amazon countries didn\u2019t want to negotiate what we saw as our birthright. For this reason and others, the mediation efforts, such as they were, didn\u2019t get off the ground.<\/p>\n<p>In early 2019, this very year, it dawned on us that if we didn\u2019t negotiate, we would lose the whole thing. We could complain, we could make speeches, but we would still lose it. So we started working on an ACTO counter-proposal which we could use as a basis for negotiation with the company. As we were just starting, the Venezuelan crisis erupted, and rendered dialogue among Amazon countries difficult. Not because of substance &#8211; we were all in agreement about our rights &#8211; but because discussing negotiating tactics become tough, considering the overall political context.<\/p>\n<p>Allow me to say that perhaps some people thought that we would never be able to come up with a joint ACTO substantive proposal. That inability could then be used as an excuse to cut short the negotiation and grant the application on the company\u2019s terms.<\/p>\n<p>Yet, miracle of miracles, with the help of the new ACTO Secretary-General, a young and brilliant Bolivian lady &#8211; I wish she could be here &#8211; we did achieve a joint counterproposal that every country in the Amazon, from Bolivia to Brazil, from Venezuela to Colombia, from Peru to Ecuador, from Guyana to Surinam, endorsed and presented. This was last April, just before ICANN 64, in Kobe.<\/p>\n<p>The ACTO proposal is balanced. It does not hinder in any way the ability of the company to exploit the .amazon gTLD for its retail and other business activities, except when it would cause confusion among the public, for instance by linking the amazon domain to names typical of Amazon culture, geography, heritage and the like. By this I mean the names of cities, rivers, religious or folkloric ceremonies and myths, medicinal herbs, typical animals and such, would all be protected. For instance, solimoes.amazon or manaus.amazon &#8211; Solimoes is the name given to the upper part of the Amazon river, Manaus is the capital city of the state of Amazonas &#8211; could not be used. But the company has not yet agreed to that.<\/p>\n<p>According to the ACTO proposal, we would share responsibility &#8211; the company on one side, ACTO and the eight Amazon nations on the other &#8211; for discussing and solving any disagreements in a prompt and fair way. All details could be negotiated to everybody\u2019s satisfaction. I underline that the ACTO proposal of 2019 was considerably less advantageous to our side than the 2015 proposal by the company itself, which shows to which lengths we were prepared to go for the sake of an agreed solution, as demanded by the Abu Dhabi advice.<\/p>\n<p>The first steps in the negotiation were promising. By dealing directly with the company, in informal consultations in which I took part personally (always reporting back to ACTO and ACTO member states, who received a copy of each email that was exchanged), we could see the lines of a possible compromise.<\/p>\n<p>So it was with renewed shock that we, Amazon countries, learned that negotiations were interrupted unilaterally by the other side, last May, right before ICANN 65 in Marrakesh. We were told there was a great hurry to conclude the issue before Marrakesh, and no further delay would be tolerated, so the negotiations were cut short. The company\u2019s proposal would be the final Public Interest Commitment, or PIC; no compromise or half-way formula with the ACTO counter-proposal would be envisaged by the Board.<\/p>\n<p>And yet here were are, at ICANN 66 in Montreal, in November, and the issue is still open. Apparently there was not so much of a hurry. So why were the negotiations broken up last May? Why did we lose the time between May and November, when Amazon countries and ACTO were ready and willing to negotiate? Maybe when you were sure of the judge\u2019s sentence in your favour, there is less impetus to reach a deal with the other side. ICANN could have played a constructive role here.<\/p>\n<p>This, dear colleagues, is not compatible neither with the Durban advice, nor with the Abu Dhabi advice. No impartial observer would conclude that GAC advice was followed in this important, precedent-setting case.<\/p>\n<p>So we are asking GAC to request the ICANN Board to designate a professional, independent mediator to facilitate the resumption of negotiations between ACTO and its member States on the one side, and the company on the other. The mediator could be empowered to seek the views of local Amazon communities as well as of the internet community, thus bringing civil society into the negotiating room.<\/p>\n<p>Such a measure would be essential if ICANN is to follow the Abu Dhabi advice, according to which it is necessary to find a mutually acceptable solution for the .amazon application. If the Board does not agree to that, then it should explain in writing why it decided not follow the Abu Dhabi advice.<\/p>\n<p>Failure to do so, I am afraid, would set a bad precedent and reflect badly on the current state of internet governance, including on its ability to establish a balance between private interests and public policy concerns. In the .amazon case, the private interests of one corporation would be allowed to run roughshod over the concerns and the cultural heritage of eight nations and tens of millions of people. We must reflect about this at the next IGF meeting in two weeks, in Berlin.<\/p>\n<p>We still think a win-win deal can be reached, one that will provide a positive impetus for internet governance instead of discrediting it. It is not too late.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Durante a ICANN 66, que esta sendo realizada em Montreal, no Canad\u00e1, o Embaixador Achilles Emilio Zaluar Neto fez um pronunciamento acerca da disputa entre o dom\u00ednio .amazon, utilizada pela gigante do varejo Amazon, com os pa\u00edses integrantes da OTCA (Organiza\u00e7\u00e3o do Tratado de Coopera\u00e7\u00e3o Amaz\u00f4nica), formada por Brasil, Col\u00f4mbia, Equador, Bol\u00edvia, Guiana, Peru, Suriname e Venezuela. Abaixo pronunciamento realizado neste domingo, dia 03 de novembro. =============== Caros colegas, procurarei ser o mais breve poss\u00edvel e me concentrarei nas quest\u00f5es mais importantes e no desenrolar recente que pode n\u00e3o ser do conhecimento geral. No entanto, pe\u00e7o a paci\u00eancia de todos, pois esta \u00e9 a \u00fanica ocasi\u00e3o em que temos para destacar uma quest\u00e3o importante para n\u00f3s. Para maiores detalhes t\u00e9cnicos da disputa, eu indicaria o documento \u00fatil chamado \u00abAMAZON update\u00bb, preparado pela secretaria, que se encontra dispon\u00edvel na p\u00e1gina do GAC e que foi revisado por Laurent agora. Para os interessados em estudar em detalhes a posi\u00e7\u00e3o do Brasil, eu indicaria que lessem coment\u00e1rios nas p\u00e1ginas Specification 13 e Application Comments no site da ICANN. N\u00e3o \u00e9 muito f\u00e1cil para um leigo encontr\u00e1-los, mas a secretaria \u00e9 muito prestativo e os ajudar\u00e1, se necess\u00e1rio. Tamb\u00e9m recomendo que leiam os [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1236","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-icann-66"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1236","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1236"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1236\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1246,"href":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1236\/revisions\/1246"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1236"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1236"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nivaldocleto.cnt.br\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1236"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}