The co-chairman’s of the Congressional Trademark Caucus, wrote to ICANN telling them they need to approve Amazon’s application for .Amazon which has been rejected due to “rights” asserted by Brazil nor Peru in relation to the Amazon Forest and tied the outcome of this issue to the IANA transition away from US oversight that ICANN is seeking:
“At this critical stage in which the United States Government prepares to transition stewardship of the JANA functions, we believe it is incumbent upon ICANN to resolve this issue, demonstrating that all stakeholders and trademark owners can be treated fairly, according to ICANN’s multistakeholder developed rules and existing international law.”
Here is the full letter written by J. Randy Forbes and Suzan DelBebe co-chair of the Congressional Trademark Caucus:
“We write to encourage you to actively seek resolution of the .AMAZON generic top level domain (gTLD).
“We understand that Amazon has recently reiterated to lCANN its interest in finding a mutually acceptable solution for the .AMAZON gTLD.
At this critical stage in which the United States Government prepares to transition stewardship of the JANA functions, we believe it is incumbent upon ICANN to resolve this issue, demonstrating that all stakeholders and trademark owners can be treated fairly, according to ICANN’s multistakeholder developed rules and existing international law.
Amazon’s 2012 applications for the .AMAZON gTLD conformed fully to the requirements of ICANN’s Applicant Guidebook and were consistent with its globally protected “Amazon” trademark.
Nevertheless , ICANN refused to allow the .AMAZON applications to proceed after the Governmental Advisory Committee objected, outside of ICANN’s application objection process, because of sovereignty concerns raised by Brazil and Peru.
In fact, neither Brazil nor Peru has any legally recognized rights let alone intellectual property rights in the term “Amazon” and there is no basis in international law for either county to assert rights in the term “Amazon. ”
Based on the rules set by the ICANN community and supported by international law generally as well as international trademark law specifically, ICANN’s rejection of the .AMAZON applications appears to have no legal basis and potentially creates a troubling precedent of governments disregarding established principles of international law, including international trademark law.
We strongly support attempts to find a mutually acceptable solution for .AMAZON and we urge ICANN to convene the interested parties.
By resolving this outstanding issue, ICANN can demonstrate to Congress that it is accountable to the global community, independent of governmental interference, and respectful of international trademark law; such a demonstration is crucial before the IANA functions transition.””
