Why did you apply for .Amazon?
We’re excited about the opportunity for innovation that the new gTLDs have presented, and filed applications for many of our key company brands. For example, customer security could be significantly improved by customers knowing the URL ends with “.amazon”. We have been using "Amazon" as a trademark for 20 years all over the world with over 2400 registrations in 170 countries including Brazil and Peru. Amazon also owns almost 26,000 second-level domain names containing the AMAZON brand, including the domain names amazon.com, amazon.pe, and amazon.com.br (at which we have a live operating website for our customers in Brazil). In fact, neither Brazil nor Peru, the two objecting countries, have registered intellectual property rights in the term “amazon” and there is no basis in international law for either country to assert rights in the term “amazon.” So, we believe that based on the rules set by the ICANN community, and supported by international trademark law, our use of the .AMAZON gTLD should be allowed.
Did Amazon apply only for .BRAND TLDs?
No. We applied for 76 gTLDs, the vast majority of which are “generic” TLDs. As of today, we’ll be operating at least 52 gTLDs.
Why did Amazon apply for so many new gTLDs?
New gTLDs provide an opportunity for innovation. We’re looking forward to using our TLDs to surprise and delight our customers globally.
Did Amazon have any reason to think its .AMAZON applications wouldn’t succeed?
What has Amazon done to resolve this issue?
How can Amazon’s applications be legally justified?
How did those objecting justify their claims against your applications?
I’m confused. Did the IRP Panel decide unanimously in Amazon’s favor or split 2-1 in Amazon’s favor?
The IRP Panel unanimously agreed that (i) ICANN’s Board, acting through the NGPC, acted in a manner inconsistent with ICANN’s Bylaws; and (ii) ICANN’s Board should promptly re-evaluate the .AMAZON Applications and make an independent determination of whether there are “well-founded, merits-based public policy reasons” for denying the .AMAZON Applications. One Panelist, who ICANN appointed, agreed with the outcome, but disagreed with part of the reasoning so he submitted a concurring and partially dissenting opinion. (ICANN had appointed that Panelist to two other IRPs. Our IRP was the first one in which he found in favor of the gTLD applicant.)
Why were all of the IRP Panelists US nationals?
IRP proceedings operate under the rules of the International Chamber of Commerce. Under those rules, Amazon and ICANN each selected a Panelist and those Panelists jointly selected the third Panelist, who became the Chair of the Panel. ICANN could have selected a non-US Panelist, and chose not to do so.
What are the implications for the multistakeholder approach if ICANN does not abide by its bylaws and the Applicant Guidebook?
What will Amazon do if the Board does not approve the .AMAZON Applications?
U.S. Statement on Geographic Names in Advance
of ICANN Durban Meeting
 Paris Convention of 1883, which is the basic building block for modern international intellectual property law.
 Madrid Agreement for the Repression of False or Deceptive Indications of Source on Goods of 1891, the Lisbon Agreement on the Protection of Appellations of Origin, and TRIPS.