JPNIC Argues Companies Shouldn’t Be Able to Get Corporate Top Level Domain Names

Group says new TLDs aren’t meant for single brands that don’t offer second level domains to the public.

One of the understood use cases for new top level domain names is a company creating .brand. Canon has already expressed its intentions to apply for .canon.

But in comments by Japan Network Information Center, which provides allocation and registration services of IP addresses and AS numbers in Japan, says this clearly isn’t the purpose of new TLDs:

The current New gTLD process is based upon a GNSO report to the Board “Introduction of New Generic Top-Level Domains” dated Sept. 11, 2007. The report is obviously a set of policy recommendations for introduction of “TLDs for registry business”, that is, TLDs which are aimed for third-party registrations of second level domain names in the TLD. This fact is clearly seen in Recommendation 1(p.19), Recommendations 16 and 19(p.21), for example, in the report. Therefore, it is obvious that these kinds of proprietary TLDs are out of scope of the current New gTLD process. We strongly urge ICANN to clearly state this fact in the forthcoming final version of the New gTLD RFP for the next round.

Although many will disagree with JPNIC on this issue, I think there hasn’t been enough thought given to the challenges of allowing a company to own its own TLD. You’d assume Canon would want a contract that has different provisions from the typical registry that wants to offer second level domain names to the public. There’s also the issue of trademarking a top level domain name. And ICANN would surely face a legal battle if it canceled a company’s registry contract based on some break.


  1. says

    I fully agree with the JPNIC argument. They hit the nail on the head. The gTLDs that would simply exist as a mere brand extension offer nothing new to the Internet consumer. First off, it’s a false security against trademark violations, that can still occur in any ccTLD. Second, a company that secures a gTLD on the basis of a trademark would have such a strong mark that they could get the .com, .net or .org either via an acquisition or via a UDRP. An example would be .canon – a fully corporate entity with no concern or services for the public. I am sure they would never want to give to a guy named Jim Canon. On the other hand, .music is truly a services-driven gTLD that would give jim’s band the chance to own

  2. says

    I agree, while Canon might be doing this as a publicity stunt. I think the new gTLD’s are to serve the general public and not corporations looking for publicity. For what purpose would someone need a dot CANON when they can just go to ?

  3. says

    I think that everyone is looking at this from the wrong angle.

    I strongly believe Canon wants to use this as a domain for a photo/media sharing service to offer to customers. It enhances their brand & keeps the customer long term. So it will be beneficial. The amount it cost to register .Canon, & give away accounts with Canon cameras would even be worth it. Think of the ROI & customer loyalty.

    JPNIC would realize that companies that do this compete with .jp in Japan. Just think about .Mac which used to be free, exact same business model. There is no way they would get this extension just to make money by people registering it. It will be tied to a service, it just makes sense for their market.

    It’s not a brand protection strategy, or a brand hype. I think it’s a clear strategy, & with GMO a very large Japan internet company being behind it, I think it will be a service based strategy. Everything is not about who can register what, buy or sell. Domains should be about use. Think New School….

  4. says


    .brand TLDs as proposed will result in profound change to the dynamics of the Internet They will create a Super league and as with all Super Leagues the cost of entry is high.

    At the moment the Internet is much more a level playing field and as a result anyone can compete – $10 for a domain plus hosting.

    A Super league for the economically advantaged destroys that level playing field and is not something to be undertaken lightly.

  5. says

    This is in pure speculation but
    Many companies have very strict guidelines when it comes to their corporate sites. Working at and Ad agency I know many global companies can’t put even certain needed tags on their site. is the corporate site
    .Canon is for canon Customers. It doesn’t conflict with the corporate site & still uses the Canon brand. It’s a very clear difference, it’s low cost, they don’t necessarily have to host every domain the same place. Each country can manage their own customer base easier. No one is uploading stuff to

    Would you want every domainer to be able to have or would you think it’s better to separate user generated content but still let it be part of your brand?

    I have no relationship with Canon, & this is no insider scoop but I do work at an agency where global clients want to just take advantage of technology. In domaining we hear of new extensions that only get bought by domainers. This is clearly a move for these domains to be used by their customer base & not just bought invested & sold. If this isn’t their plan it would shock me.

Leave a Reply