In the future brand owners may need to change their domain name strategy.
With potentially hundreds of new top level domain names heading to the internet as early as 2013, brand owners are crying foul. They’re upset about having to defensively register hundreds or even thousands of domain names across the extensions.
It’s true that some brands have defensively registered many of their marks in TLDs other than .com.
But with hundreds more to manage, does it still make sense as a strategy?
Let’s look at a couple extreme cases.
In the future, what if anyone could create any top level domain they want as part of a domain string. So for $10 I could go register domainname.wire instead of domainnamewire.com.
This is like the new TLD program on steroids. Although it would be a monumental change, it’s certainly possible.
If that happened — if there were unlimited top level domains — what would you do as a brand owner?
Obviously you can’t register your domain with millions of top levels, such as amazon.space, amazon.widget, amazon.elephant. You’d need a different strategy.
Second example: third level domains. Right now brands really don’t have a way to police third level domains on gTLDs. For example, I could create amazon.domainnamewire.com. There’s no UDRP to go after the third level domain of a second level I have registered.
Which brings me back to the first example. Right now there are millions of possible subdomains (third level) that could exist on the web. There are millions of second level domains. Why is it that someone registering your brand in a second level is such a detriment to your brand?
Yes, I get it. Right now consumers look to the second level as the identifier. But if hundreds of new TLDs come online, will they start looking to the first level? Maybe. Certainly if an unlimited number of strings could be at the top level then people would be forced to look at the top level as an identifier.
That would force brand holders to change their strategy. If it becomes impossible to register all strings that include your brand, then you’d be forced to change your strategy.
Technically right now brands can’t prevent their brand from being used somewhere in a TLD (in most cases). I can use it as a third level domain or even as a directory name.
What’s the point? The point is that maybe brands need to start looking at defensive domain registrations differently. Maybe this business of trying to control a brand in a URL string is coming to an end.
DR.DOMAIN says
Indeed…too much to think about.
BLDs says
“Maybe this business of trying to control a brand in a URL string is coming to an end.”
In fact its just beginning. If nothing else the xxx thing has shown that extorsion at the registrar level is a risk free means to make profits. If there is money to be made it will not only continue but should expand. Simple economics. There is no shortage of misinformed suckers out there, some even run big businesses
RH says
Interesting article Andrew,
I think your line about the first level becoming the indentifier would have to be the corporate way.
All brands would have to create their own .brand, redirect whatever .coms they own and tell the world anything that is not .nike for example is a fraud, its not us and always use .nike.
I think to your other point if using third level became a way to squat new rules would come about to take the whole domain.
Again IMO
Andrew Allemann says
I didn’t really mention directories, either, like domainnamewire.com/amazon
John says
Icahn and everyone else who keeps pushing this industry with more and more extensions is going to destroy all value on names. The registrars don’t care cause it’s all about sales. But, it is going to piss off all end users and create mass confusion. Hello, It’s the end users that supply the liquidity to owners. The baseball card marketplace completely collapsed by offering numerous cards by numerous companies that to this day has never recovered. That is exactly where this industry is heading towards if all these nonsense of extensions continue.
theo says
That’s why there willbe a trademark clearinghouse to address the concerns of trademark holders. How it will workout for the new gTLD’s is subject to review, so it can be adjusted when needed.
Ryan says
This is exactly why the big money will keep the new tld program from launching on time, it is a valid point. Especially to do with domain email scams and the use of those domains.
gpmgroup says
Unless there are draconian sanctions it will in the main remain cheaper to bulk register defensively, because sorting out the mess afterwards is very time consuming and very expensive.
This is like the new TLD program on steroids. Although it would be a monumental change, it’s certainly possible.
When new gTLDs don’t “work as planned” there will be calls for ICANN to lower the price and rinse and repeat.
Luke Summers says
I believe that the days of registering your brand in most or all extensions are coming to a close, particularly for smaller organisations. The core extensions will still be registered by most, but the shotgun approach just won’t be realistic in the face of ever increasing extensions.
As the number of extensions increases exponentially, the emphasise will shift from preemptive mass registration, towards core tld registration only. If someone violates a trademark of a company, then action will be taken.
In a world of hundreds or thousands of extensions, companies will be forced to protect their brands and associated trademarks with less preemptive action (domain registrations) and more reactive measures when their trademark is violated. Depending on the mechanisms in place this could involve UDRP or direct communication with the registry to confiscate the trademark infringing domain.
For larger companies it may be quite realistic to pursue active domain registration across the board and
Luke Summers says
accidently posted mid sentence…
To finish my last point, for larger companies actively registering domains across all the extensions and managing the portfolio may be possible; but for most organisations this is just not realistic.
Karl Kelman says
Another reason that trend of declining domain name importance and increasing search engine result importance been with us from the late 1990s will continue.
John says
I really hate the idea of these new unlimited tlds. It’s just a mess the Internet doesn’t need right now. Eventually it could crush the value of the original addresses. I guess like debasing a currency (figures). The Internet has always been about strategy over financial resources. With this nonsense, in the next five years if you don’t have 180k or whatever to maintain your own .brand – you’re nobody. Retarded counterproductive idea.
Taiwo says
Your article has got me thinking Andrew,unfortunately i’m seeing more downsides than ups to this potential regime change. Allot to think about ….