4 ms·

Somewhat tangential, but how many internet users(except us old-timers) really make use of domain names in their use/workflow these days? I wonder if there's so

Somewhat tangential, but how many internet users(except us old-timers) really make use of domain names in their use/workflow these days? I wonder if there's some research on this. I'd assume that most of the internet population have their smartphones/app ecosystems for getting to Amazon or even looking up hypothetical Brazilian tourist info through Google. I understand why both sides want the TLD but I'm not sure what significant usefulness it has other than property rights regarding domain names and the future of how these cases will be settled.

pergadad 7y ago
More clear to write " go to brazil.amazon" than "please Google 'Brazil Amazon official tourism board"
- justaaron 7y ago
  The Amazon and its tributaries flow through the countries of Peru, Bolivia, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and Brazil before emptying into the Atlantic Ocean 6, 437 kilometers (4,000 miles) from the Amazon's headwaters high in the Andes mountains of Peru. So, no it's not the exclusive property of Brazil.
  - seszett 7y ago
    Having it as a tld makes it clear, since you could easily have brazil.amazon, bolivia.amazon, peru.amazon, etc. That's more hierarchically correct than amazon.com.br, amazon.bo, amazon.pe. For most people though I don't think it makes a difference, as I don't think DNS hierarchy is well understood by most internet users.
    - newphonewhodis 7y ago
      I get what you are saying, however, Brazil(br) "hosts"-has it in- The Amazon; as do the other countries. I would expect a resolver to go to a top level namespace- i.e. a country that has people to run the infrastructure and not a river- and all those places scope out certain features contained with in them. In my mind: .(root server) > (global feature/country/company) > (feature/host) e.g. . > .br > amazon makes more sense than . > amazon > ccTLD. I think a better example for your point would be `.ocean` as the logical way to divided it would be pacific.ocean, atlantic.ocean, etc. however no one entity "owns" the whole or said parts of the ocean and dolphins do not want to administer DNS servers. That said, naming things is hard.
  - nkozyra 7y ago
    > So, no it's not the exclusive property of Brazil. I don't think that was the claim, it was just an example
- justaaron 7y ago
  More clear to write "mainstreet-mom-n-pop-store-killers-dumping-cheap-junk-for-ever-lower-prices-who-cares-about-any-future.com"
  - manigandham 7y ago
    They're only this successful because consumers prefer them. There's not some noble meaning or morality to having a "mom-n-pop" store.
    - RHSeeger 7y ago
      There are a lot of people that _do_ believe there is something noble and moral about mom and pop stores and supporting them. I believe the belief flows from the idea that local communities are important, and such stores are an integral part of them.
      - pwodhouse 7y ago
        What's the difference between a bourgeoisie middle class stealing labor from the masses of workers, and one titan of industry? The difference is a rounding error to the mass public.
        wutbrodo 7y ago
        I think the concern from these complainants is precisely for this bourgeoisie, not for mass labor.
      - manigandham 7y ago
        If all those people believed in them then they would buy from them. Their actions prove otherwise. It's fine to be an entrepreneur and own a small business that takes part in the local community, but that has nothing to do with the business you're in. Selling regular household merchandise is not a good business anymore.
    - pessimizer 7y ago
- icebraining 7y ago
  Why not "go to amazon.br"? It's even shorter.
  - dalai 7y ago
    Most would expect that to be the Amazon store in Brazil, similar to amazon.de or amazon.fr. It would be funny, if not poetic justice, if Brazil decided to do just that following this decision. Likely Amazon would sue them and an arbitration court would side with Amazon though.
    - jkaplowitz 7y ago
      Countries have a lot more freedom on how to administer their two-letter ccTLDs than do the operators of the gTLDs. I don't believe they're required to defer to trademark holders in the way you describe, though many choose to.
      - dalai 7y ago
        I didn't mean to imply that they have to defer to Amazon. On the other hand, countries have in the past done things that were within their rights and were still sued for large sums. I was thinking of cases like Occidental v. Ecuador.
    - LordDragonfang 7y ago
      >Likely Amazon would sue them Amazon would have to be pretty dumb (and petty) to do that after this kerfuffle.

pergadad 7y ago

More clear to write " go to brazil.amazon" than "please Google 'Brazil Amazon official tourism board"

justaaron 7y ago
The Amazon and its tributaries flow through the countries of Peru, Bolivia, Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and Brazil before emptying into the Atlantic Ocean 6, 437 kilometers (4,000 miles) from the Amazon's headwaters high in the Andes mountains of Peru. So, no it's not the exclusive property of Brazil.
- seszett 7y ago
  Having it as a tld makes it clear, since you could easily have brazil.amazon, bolivia.amazon, peru.amazon, etc. That's more hierarchically correct than amazon.com.br, amazon.bo, amazon.pe. For most people though I don't think it makes a difference, as I don't think DNS hierarchy is well understood by most internet users.
  - newphonewhodis 7y ago
    I get what you are saying, however, Brazil(br) "hosts"-has it in- The Amazon; as do the other countries. I would expect a resolver to go to a top level namespace- i.e. a country that has people to run the infrastructure and not a river- and all those places scope out certain features contained with in them. In my mind: .(root server) > (global feature/country/company) > (feature/host) e.g. . > .br > amazon makes more sense than . > amazon > ccTLD. I think a better example for your point would be `.ocean` as the logical way to divided it would be pacific.ocean, atlantic.ocean, etc. however no one entity "owns" the whole or said parts of the ocean and dolphins do not want to administer DNS servers. That said, naming things is hard.
- nkozyra 7y ago
  > So, no it's not the exclusive property of Brazil. I don't think that was the claim, it was just an example
justaaron 7y ago
More clear to write "mainstreet-mom-n-pop-store-killers-dumping-cheap-junk-for-ever-lower-prices-who-cares-about-any-future.com"
- manigandham 7y ago
  They're only this successful because consumers prefer them. There's not some noble meaning or morality to having a "mom-n-pop" store.
  - RHSeeger 7y ago
    There are a lot of people that _do_ believe there is something noble and moral about mom and pop stores and supporting them. I believe the belief flows from the idea that local communities are important, and such stores are an integral part of them.
    - pwodhouse 7y ago
      What's the difference between a bourgeoisie middle class stealing labor from the masses of workers, and one titan of industry? The difference is a rounding error to the mass public.
      - wutbrodo 7y ago
        I think the concern from these complainants is precisely for this bourgeoisie, not for mass labor.
    - manigandham 7y ago
      If all those people believed in them then they would buy from them. Their actions prove otherwise. It's fine to be an entrepreneur and own a small business that takes part in the local community, but that has nothing to do with the business you're in. Selling regular household merchandise is not a good business anymore.
  - pessimizer 7y ago
icebraining 7y ago
Why not "go to amazon.br"? It's even shorter.
- dalai 7y ago
  Most would expect that to be the Amazon store in Brazil, similar to amazon.de or amazon.fr. It would be funny, if not poetic justice, if Brazil decided to do just that following this decision. Likely Amazon would sue them and an arbitration court would side with Amazon though.
  - jkaplowitz 7y ago
    Countries have a lot more freedom on how to administer their two-letter ccTLDs than do the operators of the gTLDs. I don't believe they're required to defer to trademark holders in the way you describe, though many choose to.
    - dalai 7y ago
      I didn't mean to imply that they have to defer to Amazon. On the other hand, countries have in the past done things that were within their rights and were still sued for large sums. I was thinking of cases like Occidental v. Ecuador.
  - LordDragonfang 7y ago
    >Likely Amazon would sue them Amazon would have to be pretty dumb (and petty) to do that after this kerfuffle.