New Top Level Domains: Brand Protection Considerations

WESFACCA September 13, 2011

Martin Schwimmer, Esq.
Leason Ellis LLP Intellectual Property Attorneys http://www.leasonellis.com

4/14/2012

Slide 1

How Many gTLDs Now?


• • • •


• •
4/14/2012

.COM .NET .ORG .INFO .BIZ .EU .EDU .GOV .NAME


• • • •


• •

.MOBI .CAT .ASIA .PRO .TRAVEL .COOP .AERO .JOBS .MUSEUM


• •

.INT .TEL .MIL .ARPA

Slide 2 2

Domain Name Statistics


• • •

.COM – 97M registrations .NET – 14M .ORG – 9M .INFO – 8M (2/3 of all registrations)

4/14/2012

Slide 3 3

How Do gTLDs Fare?


• • • •



4/14/2012

.COM – 55.2% of all domains reg’s .NET – 6.5% .ORG – 4.2% .INFO – 1.9% .BIZ – 0.4% .EU - 0.4% .EDU – 0.3% .GOV – 0.1%

Slide 4 4

How Many New TLD Applications?

Estimated up to 500 New Applications in this ‘Batch’

4/14/2012

Slide 5 5

When Can We Apply?
• • •
Slide 6 6

January 12, 2012 Through April 12, 2012

4/14/2012

How Much Will Filing Cost?
• •

$185,000 Application Fee Cost of Producing the Application
Cost of Maintaining a Registry


4/14/2012

Slide 7 7

What TLDs Are People Filing For?
• • •

Rumor lists: Registries.Tel NewDomains.Org Valideus.com/Resources/gtlds-list/

4/14/2012

Slide 8 8

What TLDs Are People Filing For?

• • • •

Cities Geographical Regions Cultural communities Keywords Brands

4/14/2012

Slide 9 9

Dot Examples (Reported)

CITIES: .BERLIN, .KOLN, .NYC
REGIONS: .AND (Andalucia), .SCO (Scotland)

COMMUNITIES: .FRA (Francophone), .IRISH

4/14/2012

Slide 10 10

More Dot Examples
.KEYWORDS :
.SPORT .SECURE .BANK .MONEY .RADIO
4/14/2012

Slide 11 11

Dot Brands

.CANON .HITACHI

4/14/2012

Slide 12 12

Why Is ICANN Doing This?

ICANN FAQ: One of ICANN's key commitments is to promote competition in the domain name market while ensuring Internet security and stability. New generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs) help achieve that commitment.

4/14/2012

Slide 13 13

Will New TLDs Change The Way The DNS Works?

Probably Not.

4/14/2012

Slide 14 14

Is This The Only Opportunity To Apply?

Probably not, but this round could take years to process.

4/14/2012

Slide 15 15

Who Gets The Money?

ICANN: [We are] a nfp and this is a nfp initiative. The program is designed to be self-funding . . . If the fee collection exceeds ICANN's expenses, the community will be consulted as to how that excess should be used.

4/14/2012

Slide 16 16

Who Gets The Money?

The $185k for is for application processing by ICANN – 1/3 of that is reserved for litigation. No provision for monies from Auctions

4/14/2012

Slide 17 17

WHAT SHOULD THE BRAND OWNER WORRY ABOUT?
• • • •

Three Things: 1. Cyber-squatting 2. String-contention 3. Competition

4/14/2012

Slide 18 18

Cyber-Squatting


4/14/2012

Old Concepts: UDRP and Sunrise Periods NewConcepts: Trademark Clearinghouse, Trademark Claims, Service, Uniform Rapid Suspension [Required of All new Registries]

Slide 19 19

Cyber-Squatting: Trademark Clearinghouse

A Repository For Storing Trademark Registration Information Submitted By Trademark Owners It is not conclusive evidence of rights

4/14/2012

Slide 20 20

Cyber-Squatting: Trademark Claims Service

Clearing house registrants will receive notification of third-party land-rush registrations

4/14/2012

Slide 21 21

Cyber-squatting: Sunrise

Clearinghouse Registrants will receive notice of third-party Sunrise registrations

4/14/2012

Slide 22 22

Cyber-Squatting: Uniform Rapid Suspension

• • •

UDRP lite Suspension, not Transfer. 2 to 3 Weeks Then the name is up for grabs

4/14/2012

Slide 23 23

String Objection Process

• • •

String Confusion Legal Rights Objections Community Objections Limited Public Interest Objections UDRP-like pricing After a publication of the TLD app’n



4/14/2012

Slide 24 24

String Objection: String Confusion

May be brought by another applicant or an existing registry

4/14/2012

Slide 25 25

String Objection: Legal Rights Objections To Strings

May be brought by a Trademark Holder

4/14/2012

Slide 26 26

String Objection: Community Objections

Objection from a significant portion of the community explicitly or implicitly targeted, brought by an institution associated with that community.

4/14/2012

Slide 27 27

String Objection: Limited Public Interest Objection
• The

string is contrary to generally accepted legal norms of morality and public order.

4/14/2012

Slide 28 28

ICANN Applicant Guidebook
• http://www.icann.org/en

/topics/new-gtlds/dagen.htm

4/14/2012

Slide 29 29

Should We Apply?
• Fundamentally

a marketing decision • So marketing should pay for it.

4/14/2012

Slide 30 30

SHOULD WE APPLY? BRAND CONSIDERATIONS

Defensive String Contention? • Defensive Keyword TLDs? • Protecting Your Authorized Sales Channel • Created a ‘Trusted Zone’
4/14/2012

Slide 31 31

Marty Schwimmer, Esq. LEASON ELLIS LLP

@trademarkblog @leasonellis
Intellectual Property Attorneys E-mail: schwimmer@leasonellis.com Web: www.leasonellis.com One Barker Avenue, Fifth Floor – White Plains, NY 10601 Phone: (914) 821-9075 – Fax: (914) 288-0023

4/14/2012

Slide 32

32

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful