Registry will get a windfall in initial fees to block registrations of trademarks.
.XXX could set a record when it comes to defensive domain name registrations.
A “defensive registration” is when a brand registers a domain name solely to keep it out of the hands of cybersquatters or competitors.
When you look back at previous new TLDs you’ll find a number of large brands defensively registered their domains. But you’ll still find lots of brands that don’t bother to register .info, .biz, and other newer extensions.
When .tel came out, some companies that were aware of it didn’t bother to register. They didn’t think it was the end of the world if someone else nabbed the domain name.
With .Co there was a bit more concern because of its similarity to .com.
But .xxx scares them.
Law firms are emailing their clients (I received one such notice last night). The trademark press is constantly writing about it.
And if there’s one thing most brands don’t want to be associated with, it’s porn.
Thankfully, .xxx registry ICM Registry is providing an innovative way for these companies to defensively register their domains. It’s more of a “non-registration” that will block the domain from being registered by another party.
So let’s say Verizon is worried about someone registering Verizon.xxx. It doesn’t have to register the domain annually for itself; it can pay a one time fee to block it for as long as ICM runs the .xxx registry.
This fee is expected to be about $200-$300 at the retail level.
But brands will have only 30 days to take advantage of this blocking offer, so they should educate themselves quickly.
Given the press’ inclination to write about .xxx, I think ICM Registry is going to get a lot of these defensive registrations.
That said, smaller brands probably don’t need to worry unless they have enemies. At about $75 per year for registration, .xxx cybersquatters will have to limit their activities.
It will also be interesting to see how much certain brands are willing to pay to prevent registrations in other controversial top level domain names possibly on the horizon, including .sex and .porn.
*
Hmmm.
Sounds like legal extortion.
*
The “scare” factor seems irrational to a fair extent.
Any concerned brand owner might do well to ask themselves why a “confused consumer” would be looking for that brand owner under brand.xxx in the first place.
For brands having no relation to adult subject matter, the domain name itself would be an unmistakable tip-off to a consumer that such a site is probably not a likely place to find ordinary consumer goods and services.
@ John – irrational, yes. But the trademark guy at a (at least large) company isn’t going to risk it.
@Ms Domainer
“It is” legal extortion!
I have some clients (non adult) who wanted to secure .XXX as soon it was mentioned .XXX was approved.
They don’t want to see their brand being related to .XXX
What a joke, I really hope that IP lobby steps up their game and succeeds in blocking this gTLD nonsense (.xxx included) once and for all.
What a great business model.
Apply for a potentially offensive extension, then legally extort brand owners hundreds of dollars to block squatters getting the domains.
In reality these obvious TM domains should be blocked for free. This is a load of BS in my opinion.
Brad
“In reality these obvious TM domains”
Which ones? Do you have a list?
John,
I think famous brands are pretty well known.
There is a gray area, but there is also black & white.
How about Disney.xxx, Microsoft.xxx, Google.xxx, eBay.xxx, etc.
This sets a bad precedent IMO. You start with a potentially offensive extension, then basically strong arm TM holders into paying an outrageous fee to protect their brands from squatters.
If the gTLD are ever actually released there needs to be a better process.
Expecting famous TM holders to protect obvious famous brands, in every new extension, for outrageous reg prices is ridiculous.
Brad