by Herman Manson (@marklives)The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the body responsible for the Internet’s naming system, is working its way through nearly two thousand applications for New Generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD) names.
It had invited companies and organisations to apply for new domains to be created in a similar vein to .com, .net, .org etc. Only this time brands 
could apply to register for gTLD names as well. Companies such as Abbott Laboratories have applied to register .ABBOTT, Accenture Global Services applied for .ACCENTURE and Aktiebolaget Electrolux for .AEG.
South African linked companies and organisations that have applied for new Generic Top-Level Domain names includes .AFRICA, .CAPETOWN, .DURBAN, .JOBURG by UniForum SA, .AFRICAMAGIC, .KYKNET, .MNET, .MZANSIMAGIC and .MULTICHOICE by M-Net, .DSTV and .GOTV by Multichoice, .NASPERS by Intelprop (Proprietary) Limited (a wholly owned subsidiary of Naspers), MTN via MTN Dubai Limited and .SUPERSPORT by Supersport.
Swiss based Richemont DNS Inc. applied for .NETAPORTER, .CARTIER, .MONTBLANC amongst its 8 applications (Of course Richemont has a South African connection through Johann Rupert and a listing on the JSE). For .CARTIER Richemont justifies it application by arguing that “a new gTLD will reinforce our brand worldwide and provide a more secure communication channel” and “a new gTLD will provide our authorized dealer network with a space that sets them apart from counterfeiters and provides them with the direct relation to Cartier in the minds of the public.”
For owners of global brands like Richemont or Coca-cola the new gTLD names offer the opportunity to expand their domain strategy and entrench their brand names at a new level in the digital environment. But some serious flaws have emerged in the process managed by ICANN as the types of registration applications by brands become clearer.
There are the applications for registering generic words as new gTLD names by companies for exclusive use rather than by registries who would open them up to the broader business community – look no further than th eapplication for .BABY (by Johnson & Johnson) . Johnson & Johnson says in its application that “a limited number of generic second-level domain names relevant to the baby care industry would initially be reserved/allocated to Johnson & Johnson and its qualified subsidiaries and affiliates.” Johnson & Johnson also applied for .AFAMILYCOMPANY.
L’Oréal is angling to own .SALON, .BEAUTY, .HAIR, .MAKEUP and .SKIN amongst others. Conceivably it would exclude competitors from accessing these top level domains. It is also unclear what leverage owning .SKIN for example will give L’Oréal in global copyright and trademark law over the long term.
The application guide merely states that “Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as establishing or granting to Registry Operator any property ownership rights or interests in the TLD or the letters, words, symbols or other characters making up the TLD string” but 15 years down the line a court might find differently should the domain have become closely aligned with public perception of the brand. Wal-Mart believes it should own .GROCERY which it says will have “no public registration sales market.” Main street grocers be damned.
Amazon wants to own .APP, .AUTHOR, .BOOK, .BUY, .CAA, .CIRCLE, .DEAL, .DRIVE, .FAST, .FIRE, .FREE, .GAME, .KIDS, .PLAY, .READ, .SONG, .NEWS and .STORE amongst its numerous applications. The mission of the .STORE registry is, according to the Amazon application, to “provide a unique and dedicated platform for Amazon while simultaneously protecting the integrity of its brand and reputation.” (They seem to have submitted a similarly worded and formatted document on all their applications). Nothing in the application suggests it will benefit the broader internet community.
The open application brief by ICANN also allowed the League of Arab States to apply for the domain .arab. It could potentially turn the domain into a political propaganda tool and affect legitimate public interest registrations for the domain (like gayrights.arab).
Also of concern is the large number of applications originating from tiny territories (and tax havens) like the Cayman Islands (91) and the Virgin Islands (72). Will these territories enforce international laws and agreements governing intellectual property rights? A company in the Virgin Islands for example hopes to register .ZULU for the ‘benefit’ of the Zulu nation.
Let’s take a step back and explain how the whole gTLD process got started. ICANN has gone through two previous rounds of expanding top level domain names which has resulted in an expansion from the original .gov, .mil, .com, .net, .edu and .org domains to include domain suffixes such as .mobi, .jobs and .xxx.
Mike Silber, a Director at ICANN, says the initial two rounds to expand the generic top level domain space saw the introduction of some new generic names (like .mobi and .travel) but did not generate the significant changes expected, in part due to restrictions on the use of those names.
With the increase in user generated content on Web 2.0 and changing business models ICANN had been requested to add new names that would help stimulate innovation on the Internet.
A four year process followed which resulted in the call for new gTLD applications and which for the first time allowed brands to register their own names. This could facilitate better internal communication for these brand owned domain names and greater control over their brand in the digital environment.
Looking at the list of applicants and the names they have applied for , it would seem that some brands have been convinced by consultants into registering applications that are of questionable value. It costs $185 000 to apply for a new gTLD which is not an insignificant investment however is relatively minor in comparison with the overall costs of operating a gTLD.
Arthur Goldstuck, the MD of World Wide Worx, says the gTLD application process will undermine the credibility of ICANN if it is seen is ‘corporatizing’ the Internet in a way that limits rather than enhances its democratic credentials. The costly (at 5000 Euros) formal appeals process already makes a mockery of talk about a level playing field as it clearly puts smaller companies and start-ups at a disadvantage very early in the application review process.
Goldstuck also says that 15 years from now ownership of generic words by companies for private use might well create bottlenecks as possible top level domain names run out. This will again put smaller brands and start-ups at a distinct disadvantage.
Consumer confusion might also become an issue – most people will look at .com or region specific domains suffix like co.za or co.uk to find the business they are looking for.
Unless ICANN rejects applications by brands for generic words it will inhibit the democratisation of the Internet by moving more power into the hands of global conglomerates intent only on their own bottom line and with little interest, commercial or otherwise, in an open and free Internet economy. It will in effect be endorsing anti-competitive behaviour by these brands.
If it does reject the generic domain names registered from exclusive benefit of brands it would still be open to legitimate criticism in not ensuring limitations placed on applications for gTLD names were sufficiently clear to begin with opening the window for consultants to cash in on a process that will leave their clients disillusioned and out of a considerable amount of money.
Also see: Brand strategy required for new gTLD names
Industry news you will make time for. Subscribe here. It’s free!
Comments are closed.