Prior to the launch ofthe New gTLD Program, there were only 22 generic top-level domains (gTLDs), such as .com, .net, and .org. The program allowed applicants to propose new gTLDs, which could be generic terms, brand names, or geographic names.
In 2011, ICANN launched the New gTLD Program: an initiative that allows organizations and individuals to apply for and create new top-level domain names. The main objective of this Program was to increase competition, innovation, and choice in the domain name space, resulting in the creation of over 1,000 new gTLDs, including .google, .amazon, .bank, and .music.
And whilst it helped to increase competition and choice by opening up new opportunities for organizations and individuals to create new, unique and memorable domain names, it did not really meet the expectations for more innovation in the domain name industry.
Let's break these down:
The primary objective was to increase competition in the domain name market, thereby offering more choices to consumers. By allowing the creation of numerous new gTLDs, ICANN intended to break the monopoly of traditional TLDs like .com.
With over 1,000 new top-level domains having been introduced, the Program has mainly achieved this objective.
However, numbers show that 10 new gTLDs account for the vast majority of domain names that have been registered within all new extensions that have been launched as a result of the New gTLD Program. Furthermore, when looking at the number of registry services providers who are supporting theseTLDs from a technical and operational point of view, we can only conclude that there are actually less actors due to consolidation in the sector.
With the New gTLDProgram, ICANN wanted to foster innovation within the infrastructure, encouraging applicants to introduce new services and applications around newTLDs.
Unfortunately, theProgram did not deliver upon this promise, mainly because of ICANN’s rather traditional stance towards the technical operation of gTLDs. Even before theProgram was launched, we have seen registries struggling with the introduction of non-domain related data in the DNS. And even when new technologies like blockchain were introduced, ICANN conservatively rejected these proposals, referring to possible technical and operational issues with the DNS.
Perhaps the most innovative approach was made by brand owners who applied for their own brand-TLD – or “dotBrand”.
Since the introduction of new gTLDs raised concerns with the intellectual property community, ICANN introduced new processes and procedures to allow brand owners to prevent and tackle trademark infringement.
Examples include the mandatory use of a Trademark Clearinghouse and the Uniform Rapid Suspension procedure.
By presenting the Program as a platform for new business opportunities and offering a mechanism for diverse business models to flourish, ICANN sought to contribute to economic growth within the domain name industry.
%402x.svg){kind=icon}
%402x.svg){kind=small}
%402x.svg){kind=icon}
