Internet Domains, Trademark

BEGINNING OF THE END OR JUST A NEW BEGINNING: The expansion of the gTLD space and the revised Draft Application Guidebook

The end is near, or at least nearer, for those who have been following ICANN’s proposal to expand the generic top level domain (“gTLD”) space.  On June 1, 2010, ICANN released the fourth version of the Draft Applicant Guidebook [available at] setting forth the procedures and requirement for applying for a unique gTLD.  Public comment on the revised Guidebook can be made through July 21, 2010.  Judging from the number and substance of the changes made between versions three and four of the Draft Applicant Guidebook, we may be entering the endgame of this process and trademark owners need to decide how they plan to address the challenges presented by an expanded domain space.

If this is a new topic for you, ICANN, the organization responsible for the creation and implementation of domain names, agreed in principal in 2008 to allow any entity that can demonstrate the organizational, financial and technical capability, to apply for a unique generic top level domain, i.e. .yourbrand; .retail; .berlin etc.  Since that time, ICANN has been working with its various constituencies to create the process for establishing these new extensions.

The privilege of having a unique top level domain will not come cheap.  Under the current Guidelines, there is $185,000 application fee for each proposed extension.  Additional fees may be incurred if an extended review of the application is required or if a third-party files an objection to the application.  If an application is successful, in addition to the costs of operating the gTLD, there will be an annual fee of $25,000 paid to ICANN as well as transactional fees if a certain number of domains are registered or renewed with the new extension.  By the time everything is added up, companies can estimate that it may cost between $400,000-$500,000 to secure a new gTLD.  Despite these costs, a number of entities have already declared an interest in securing a new gTLD.  See

The implications of the proposed expansion for trademark owners are quite significant.  Trademark owners will now need to protect their brands not only at the second level, (to the left of the dot, i.e. “”) but also at the top level (to the right of the dot i.e. “.brand”).  With potentially hundreds of new gTLDs, the avenues for cybersquatting, phishing and other malicious conduct will expand exponentially.  While it seems unlikely that a cybersquatter would attempt to register a gTLD with an unassociated brand name given the costs associated with a gTLD application and the ability of a trademark owner to object to such an application, it is probable that someone will attempt to register second level domain names under the new extensions in bad faith.

There may also be significant benefits for securing a unique gTLD.  A unique gTLD may permit a business to consolidate all of its electronic and Internet communications under a single extension.  For instance, all websites associated with a brand could carry the .brand extension.  All e-mail communications from the business would have an @email.brand address.  Inasmuch as the business would control the registration of all domain names using the gTLD, this strategy should allow the entity to prevent cybersquatting utilizing the extension and may reduce the effectiveness of other forms of cybersquatting as customers come to expect all electronic interactions with the business to come from its unique gTLD.  The owner of the gTLD will also have greater control over the security of its domains and information.  That being said, given the initial and ongoing costs of running a gTLD, these benefits may be difficult to justify unless the gTLD also creates a new and sustainable revenue stream (i.e. through second level registrations from vendors, associated services provides, associated companies, etc.).

Inasmuch as the procedures for registering new generic top level domains is still being decided, companies should use this time to formulate a strategy for what appears to be the inevitable launch of new gTLDs.  Any entity with significant trademarks will need to consider monitoring the applications filed for new gTLDs so that an objection can be filed against an application if need be.  It may also be advisable to monitor domain name registrations at the second level of the new gTLDs to take advantage of the mechanisms being put in place by ICANN to combat bad faith registrations.  See and   Companies should also consider consulting internally amongst its business, legal, marketing and IT departments to determine if it makes sense to file an application for a new gTLD during the first round of applications to reduce the risks that another entity will adopt a gTLD that will preclude them from securing the desired gTLD(s) in the future or if it is better to wait and see whether any of the new gTLDs are widely used and accepted by consumers before committing to filing an application.

No matter what strategy is adopted, one thing is certain, once ICANN’s deliberations end, the work of trademark owners in protecting their brands in the expanded top level domain space, has only just begun.

Trevor Schmidt

About Trevor Schmidt

Trevor Schmidt is an associate in the Triangle office practicing in the Intellectual Property group. Prior to joining Moore & Van Allen in 2007, he was an associate with a Raleigh-based, intellectual property litigation law firm, where he participated in intellectual property and products liability litigation. Since joining the firm, Mr. Schmidt focuses his practice in the areas of domestic and international trademark prosecution and protection, trademark opposition and cancellation, copyright, intellectual property licensing and transactional work.


No comments yet.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Welcome to the MVA IP Law Blog!

Moore & Van Allen’s IP Law Blog covers hot topics in U.S. and international intellectual property law and provides insight into critical litigation, legislative, regulatory and policy developments. In today’s highly competitive and rapidly developing business climate, technological advancements and the protection of intellectual property rights are paramount concerns common to companies, universities, and individuals operating in nearly every industry.

Connect to Recent Authors

  • Matt Witsil:  View Matt Witsil's Bio View Matt Witsil's LinkedIn profile
  • Emmett Weindruch: View Emmett Weindruch's Bio View Emmett Weindruch's LinkedIn profile
  • Todd Taylor:  View Todd Taylor's Bio View Todd Taylor's LinkedIn profile
  • John Slaughter:  View John Slaughter's Bio View John Slaughter's LinkedIn profile
  • Nick Russell:  View Nick Russell's Bio
  • Ellen Rubel:  View Ellen Rubel's Bio View Ellen Rubel's LinkedIn profile
  • Esther Queen:  View Esther Queen's Bio View Esther Queen's LinkedIn profile
  • Steve Phillips:  View Steve Phillip's Bio View Steve Phillip's LinkedIn profile
  • Chuck Moore:  View Chuck Moore's Bio View Chuck Moore's LinkedIn profile
  • Mark Wilson:  View Mark Wilson's Bio View Mark Wilson's LinkedIn profile
  • Chris Knors:  View Chris Knors' Bio View Chris Knors' LinkedIn profile
  • Jeff Gray:  View Jeff Gray's Bio View Jeff Gray's LinkedIn profile
  • Andy Gerschutz:  View Andy Gerschutz's Bio View Andy Gerschutz's LinkedIn profile
  • Jim Edwards:  View Jim Edwards' Bio View Jim Edwards' LinkedIn profile

  • Subscribe to Blog via Email

    Follow MVA


    Blog Topics


    Our IP Practice

    Moore & Van Allen is located in the Research Triangle and Charlotte, North Carolina – two emerging hubs in the areas of biotech and energy. Moore & Van Allen’s intellectual property lawyers are highly-skilled and innovative in their approach to assisting clients in using patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets and technology to achieve their business objectives.

    Our “business focused” team combines legal know-how with the technical proficiency and industry experience necessary to navigate our clients through matters in areas as diverse as nuclear power, navigation systems, microprocessor design, pollution control, pharmaceuticals, semi-conductor manufacturing, food processing, telecommunications, internet applications, computer software, business methods and consumer products.

    We offer a full range of patent, trademark, and copyright services, and our team is equipped with IP litigators with substantial state, federal, and international experience. To benefit and best serve our clients, we leverage our ongoing working relationships with highly qualified intellectual property practitioners and agents in virtually every country in the world. Read More About Our Practice and Meet the MVA IP Team.


    No Attorney-Client Relationship Created by Use of this Website: Neither your receipt of information from this website, nor your use of this website to contact Moore & Van Allen or one of its attorneys creates an attorney-client relationship between you and Moore & Van Allen. As a matter of policy, Moore & Van Allen does not accept a new client without first investigating for possible conflicts of interests and obtaining a signed engagement letter. (Moore & Van Allen may, for example, already represent another party involved in your matter.) Accordingly, you should not use this website to provide confidential information about a legal matter of yours to Moore & Van Allen.

    No Legal Advice Intended: This website includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances. You should contact an attorney for advice on specific legal problems. (Read All)