6 ms·

Does it not seem fucked up that we're allowing corporations to make their own exclusive TLDs in the first place?

7dare 8y ago
I don't get why Amazon would get control of the entire TLD. Can't these new TLDs be managed by some other entity which hands out domains to those that want them?
- icebraining 8y ago
  Amazon got it under ICANN's New gTLD program. There have been over 1200 TLDs allocated: https://icannwiki.org/New_gTLD_Program https://icannwiki.org/New_gTLD_Program
  - mejari 8y ago
    This is How, not Why
    - Kalium 8y ago
      The "Why" is because Amazon decided to keep the gTLD for itself, rather than act as a registrar. The document linked by grandparent also goes into the historical background of how this process came to pass.
eeZah7Ux 8y ago
It absolutely is. Trademarks can be enforced only in a specific context e.g. I can use "amazon" as a name for my cat or a restaurant but not an online marketplace. Giving a whole TLD to a brand name is like giving an infinitely broad context to trademark.
- icebraining 8y ago
  How is that different than giving them Amazon.com?
  - kadendogthing 8y ago
    Well, because the .com TLD is meant for commercial use. Amazon owns the commercial trademark in basically every market that has such laws.
    - icebraining 8y ago
      Amazon has a commercial trademark on some specific areas of commerce. There are many other Amazon trademarks owned by other people, even in the US alone.
      - kadendogthing 8y ago
        Sure. But you asked how it was different. Amazon has a domain name under a commercial TLD, .com. It doesn't have it's brand as a TLD, nor should anyone. Amazon does have a very good claim to make that in the commercial space, people associate the word "amazon" with the company. It might not always be that way, but right now that is a very reasonable claim. If you think someone else should have amazon the domain, no one should have amazon, or whatever else, that's a nifty conversation to have. But it's not what is being discussed.
        icebraining 8y ago
        They're both domains, I'm asking why should they be treated differently, just because they're at different levels. The reason given was that the context was too broad, but so is the "commercial" context across the whole world. If Amazon should have the second level domain because it's the most well know association of the word at the commerce level, then why shouldn't it be given the top level domain if it has the most well known association of the word, period?
        8y ago

I don't get why Amazon would get control of the entire TLD. Can't these new TLDs be managed by some other entity which hands out domains to those that want them?

icebraining 8y ago
Amazon got it under ICANN's New gTLD program. There have been over 1200 TLDs allocated: https://icannwiki.org/New_gTLD_Program https://icannwiki.org/New_gTLD_Program
- mejari 8y ago
  This is How, not Why
  - Kalium 8y ago
    The "Why" is because Amazon decided to keep the gTLD for itself, rather than act as a registrar. The document linked by grandparent also goes into the historical background of how this process came to pass.

eeZah7Ux 8y ago

It absolutely is. Trademarks can be enforced only in a specific context e.g. I can use "amazon" as a name for my cat or a restaurant but not an online marketplace. Giving a whole TLD to a brand name is like giving an infinitely broad context to trademark.

icebraining 8y ago
How is that different than giving them Amazon.com?
- kadendogthing 8y ago
  Well, because the .com TLD is meant for commercial use. Amazon owns the commercial trademark in basically every market that has such laws.
  - icebraining 8y ago
    Amazon has a commercial trademark on some specific areas of commerce. There are many other Amazon trademarks owned by other people, even in the US alone.
    - kadendogthing 8y ago
      Sure. But you asked how it was different. Amazon has a domain name under a commercial TLD, .com. It doesn't have it's brand as a TLD, nor should anyone. Amazon does have a very good claim to make that in the commercial space, people associate the word "amazon" with the company. It might not always be that way, but right now that is a very reasonable claim. If you think someone else should have amazon the domain, no one should have amazon, or whatever else, that's a nifty conversation to have. But it's not what is being discussed.
      - icebraining 8y ago
        They're both domains, I'm asking why should they be treated differently, just because they're at different levels. The reason given was that the context was too broad, but so is the "commercial" context across the whole world. If Amazon should have the second level domain because it's the most well know association of the word at the commerce level, then why shouldn't it be given the top level domain if it has the most well known association of the word, period?
        8y ago