Study sheds light on how many brand managers register domain names defensively.
Minds + Machines, which offers services to new top level domain name applicants, has released a new study showing how brands register their domain names in newer top level domain names.
The report’s authors certainly have a motivation to push new TLDs forward, but so far this is the most conclusive and detailed report I’ve seen on the subject of defensive registrations. I’d welcome a similar study from trademark interests.
A defensive registration is when a brand owner registers a domain name to keep it out of the hands of others, rather than with the intention of using the domain. Minds + Machines found that only 29% of the 1043 brands owned by the Fortune 100 companies were registered in “newer” top level domain names.
If you exclude some of the nascent TLDs, such as .cat and .travel, the number is closer to 40%-60%. .Info and .biz are a bit higher.
The study considered a domain registered regardless of whom owned it (the company or a possible cybersquatter).
On a new TLD panel I moderated during Domainer Mardi Gras, Demand Media VP Jeffrey Eckhaus noted that most brands won’t need to register names in many of the TLDs. For example, Verizon doesn’t need to register Verizon.shoes.
On the other hand, attorney Mike Rodenbaugh noted that Nike might feel compelled to register dozens of its brand names in .shoes.
Trademark holders have legitimate concerns about protecting their brands in domain names. It’s not just protection from cybersquatting, but also phishing. I believe a number of new TLD applicants have part of their business plan to earn significant money through inflated prices during the trademark sunrise period. At the same time, most of these companies are worrying about what might be rather than protecting their brands in existing TLDs.
But the bottom line is that newer TLDs get little to no type-in traffic. And with little traffic, there’s not much for brand manager to worry about.
Domain Names says
“And with little traffic, there’s not much for brand manager to worry about.”
Wouldn’t trademark owners be worried that someone else could register their mark in a different TLD, build a nefarious website that could be confusing to consumers, and do one of these things to get traffic:
1) Rely on SEO
2) Embark on an Adwords campaign
3) Email/spam campaign from the url directing people to that website
Andrew Allemann says
@ Domain Names – yes, I’d say both that and phishing would be their top concerns. Pharmaceuticals seem particularly aggressive in alternative extensions.
Jothan Frakes says
Hi Andrew, thank you for taking the time to look at the study and writing an article on it.
We made sure to publish the support data along with the study, because we all too frequently have witnessed alarmist, sensationalized (and often baseless) statistics being presented without any factual support.
I do want to make a comment to clarify the results and their interpretation.
If a domain is taken on the results, it does not mean the brand themselves were registrant, it only means that it is ‘taken’.
The study only looked at if the domain was available or not, it did not go into review of the registrant. If a domain was ‘taken’ on our study, it may be the brand owner has registered the domain name or used a registry blocking mechanism, it may be a registrant other than the brand owner, or in the case of some of the two character domains, it may be restricted by rules.
The overall objective was to use facts to illustrate the truth of the matter. And we made sure to have the results reviewed and confirmed by a third party (domaintools.com) to re-inforce the transparency and ability to repeat the outcome.
Andrew Allemann says
Thanks Jothan.
John McCormac says
A very interesting study and article. I think that trademark owners would be more interested in protecting their trademarks in major ccTLDs rather than in some of the newer gTLDs. The com/net/org tuple (where a TM owner would own the domain across these TLDs) seem to be commonest with older trademarks. Trademarks tend to be jurisdictional in nature so a brand like Nike would theoretically have to protect its trademark in each jurisdiction in which it operates. Perhaps only global brands (Google and Microsoft being good examples) would be intent on registering in each gTLD and ccTLD.
Andrew Allemann says
@ John – I think the bottom line with trademark owners is it would be easier for them if new TLDs aren’t released. How much more difficult it will be with new TLDs is debatable. This study seems to indicate it wouldn’t be that big of a deal, although I suppose it depends on the number of new TLDs introduced.
As for the argument that trademark holders will actually have it easier because they can get .brand, that’s hogwash. The people peddling that idea know it, too. I don’t care if Nike has .Nike, they’re still going to need all of the same terms in .com, and perhaps in other TLDs as well.
John McCormac says
In some respects it would be Andrew.
Most trademark holders with global brands would, by now, regard protecting their marque in various TLDs as simply business. However the ‘DNA’ of the gTLDs ( http://www.hosterstats.com/com-tld.php )would indicate that the situation about protecting trademarks is not that clear when it moves away from the global brands. Only 38.8k domains were registered across com/net/org/biz/info/mobi/asia/tel. There is a clear fall off in interest in the newer gTLDs. The newer gTLDs are going to have to break through that lack of interest in order to gain some kind of market share. I think that most of them will turn into zombie TLDs after a few years while a few well be wild successes. It definitely is dependent on the number of new gTLDs.
That trademark holders will have it easier with .brand is not my argument. I think that such a move to a .brand would be highly counterproductive for any major brand in the short to medium term because people tend to think in terms of .com/.ccTLD. Over the last ten years, the market has shifted from being primarily a .com/net/org one to a far more complex one and the ccTLD registries have had to establish their brands in the face of massive competition from .com TLD. However what has happened does not bode well for the newer gTLDs as many of the recently launched gTLDs have found it very difficult to gain market share at country level markets and they often end up representing less than 5% of the country level market share of .com or .ccTLD. Where the gTLDs make up for this is in their global nature but even so, it will be extremely difficult for new gTLDs to gain market share unless they have a very good unique selling point such as a city gTLD.