gTLD Strategy

Here at FairWinds, we take a lot of pride in the services we offer clients around new gTLDs. But traditionally, our services have focused on domain names in existing gTLDs – specifically, advising clients on the best ways to use domains to promote and protect their brands online. This is the major underlying mission of the work we do. That’s why we found it so amusing when we noticed that cybersquatters had begun registering domain names referencing brands’ new gTLD applications. Call it meta-cybersquatting, if you will, squatting on domains that are about...domains.

Say there was a company called Brand X that applied for a new gTLD. Recently, we’ve seen a rash of domains like BrandXDomain.com, BrandXDomains.com and BrandXNic.com (many existing registries use the term “Nic” in their names, especially ccTLD registries) being registered by opportunistic third parties.

In theory, this is nothing new – we’ve blogged on FairWinds’ flagship blog, Domain Name Strategy, numerous times about cybersquatters moving in to take advantage of new developments or breaking news. That’s why when a client is about to launch a new product or service, we recommend that the client preemptively register domain names referencing that product or service. If Brand X decides to launch a new Wonder Widget product, we would recommend registering domains like BrandXWonderWidget.com, WonderWidgetBrandX.com, and others.

On the bright side, because these newly squatted gTLD domains generally contain a trademark (the company’s name), they are fairly easy targets for recovery via the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy or other means.

Lucky for brands, domain name recovery is one of those traditional services we’re so good at.

With the Public Meeting in Prague taking place less than two weeks after ICANN’s big reveal of the 1,930 new gTLD applications, it’s no surprise that certain applications and applicants were discussed openly during various sessions. For example, during the Public Forum on Thursday afternoon, a 14-year-old boy and a 16-year-old girl from China (ICANN’s youngest participants ever?) stepped up to the open microphone to express her support for an open, unrestricted .KIDS gTLD. (more...)

After nearly a full week of debates, discussions, meetings, and even a handful of thinly veiled jabs from community members, the ICANN Board officially pronounced Digital Archery dead and gone today at around 2:35 PM, Prague time, during the Public Forum here at the ICANN Public Meeting.

Yes, there was applause. (more...)

Early this morning, at 7:30 AM Prague time, a group of new gTLD applicants and members of the gTLD Registries Stakeholder Group (RySG) gathered in a meeting room to adopt the charter for a new group, the New TLD Applicant Group, or NTAG. The group was established under the umbrella of the RySG; its charter was based off the RySG charter and the group will utilize RySG resources like a mailing list and an administrator who can set up conference calls. (more...)

In the few days since ICANN made the decision to suspend the Digital Archery system for batching applications, discussions about next step have, not altogether unsurprisingly, focused not on how to improve Digital Archery, but alternatives to replace it entirely. Perhaps most significant is the groundswell that seems to be forming around the idea of tossing out batching completely, and instead evaluating all applications at once. (more...)

Yesterday, ICANN made waves by announcing that it had suspended the Digital Archery process for batching. In the public statement, ICANN stated, “The primary reason is that applicants have reported that the timestamp system returns unexpected results depending on circumstances." The decision came when the Digital Archery process was a mere five days away from closing – and still, only 20 percent of applicants had recorded a timestamp, or fired their digital “arrows” at that point, amounting to about 386 of the 1,930 applications. (more...)

One week after ICANN revealed 1,930 applications for new gTLDs, the Internet community continues to debate the validity of many parts of the application process. In particular, a great deal of chatter kicked up over the weekend about whether or not a brand’s ownership of a generic-term gTLD is anti-competitive. This debate has been fueled largely by corporate applications for generic words as gTLDs, like Amazon’s application for .MOVIE (in fact, Google and Amazon have been taking most of the flak, given their large volume of applications). (more...)

Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised at this point. But this morning, when we woke up and checked our email to find there had been yet another technical glitch with ICANN, we couldn’t help but groan.

Let’s go back to the New gTLD Applicant Guidebook. In early versions, ICANN requires that the primary and secondary contact for each application provide their home addresses. In the version published in January, just before the TLD Application System (TAS) opened, there was an update that assured applicants that these street addresses would not be made public. (more...)

If you’re anything like us here at FairWinds, you’re visiting this blog while taking a break from parsing through the lengthy list of new gTLD applications that ICANN published yesterday on Reveal Day. And if you’re anything like the clients we work with, you know that the biggest takeaway from all the data is this: the way all brands do business online is about to change. (more...)