Ever since ICANN announced its intention to expand the number of Internet top level domains it met noisy opposition from brand and trademark holders egged on by their intellectual property lawyers.  They were concerned about the possibility of online fraud and cybersquatting.

Their totally appropriate demands for safeguards and the apparent lack of interest in the new gTLDs by brand marketers combined to slow the program’s progress to a snail’s pace.  But in recent months, the marketers have begun to warm to the possibility.  A report commissioned by the French domain name registrar, Gandi, called “Liberalisation of the Internet,” found that only one-third of companies surveyed even knew about the program.  But of those that did were “excited about the opportunities in the areas of global branding.”

This prospective value has now been matched by retrospective advantage to gTLDs that already exist but reflect the likely approach of those to come.  Like .travel which was approved in 2005.

In recent days, the organization which manages the .travel registry has reported increased consumer familiarity with the address.  And industry partners and others who report on them are noting that the new names are drawing increased attention by search engines, like Google. Even earlier, ICANN’s Implementation Recommendation Team offered a view of additional safeguards that seem to be getting some traction.   What is certain is the program will adopt stronger brand and trademark protections than have heretofore been seen.

A reasonable person would think that these moves would cause the intellectual property lawyers to take a step back and review.  But that reasonable person would be wrong.  Despite the evidence of what good has happened, even those most closely a part of ICANN continue to focus on the darket clouds they can imagine.

In a recent news report, “Steven Metalitz, president of Icann’s Intellectual Property Constituency, has warned that firms failing to register new domain names with generic extensions could become victims of cybersquatting.”   At a time when the gTLD program is gaining ground among the clients for whom they work, the lawyers constructive criticism has become just criticism.

As ICANN gets closer to issuing the RFP for new gTLDs, the original black-and-white argument against the plan is fading away but not the opposition.  Now, as smart marketers are coming around to the real-world value of owning a branded domain name extension, the nay-sayers are turning to other, equally unsubtle criticisms.

The new gTLDs will create “ghettos.” But then couldn’t that criticism be leveled at every sponsored top level domain, like .cat, .jobs and .travel?  And what about the country code top level domains?

The current case in point is everyone’s favorite new gTLD, .eco.  A commitment to the environment, a plan to finance green businesses and an application team including former Vice President Al Gore.  A idea good enough to draw other, equally green groups intending to offer a competing .eco application with their own international man of green, Mikail Gorbachev and his Green Cross.

This should all make for a lively stew of an agenda at ICANN’s meeting in Seoul in late October.  We got a taste (pun intended) of gTLD value in Sydney when chef and restauranteur Wolfgang Puck flew in to promote his interest in .food and a view of the fight over those with real value when two .music groups attended the meeting in Mexico City.

What is clear is that the program will launch, the process will winnow the applicants the market will pick the winners.  As of now, to quote Shaw, all we are doing is “haggling over price.”

There is a thaw coming to the ice-cold reception that brand and trademark holders gave to ICANN’s plan to introduce a host of new gTLDs.  In recent days, some serious publications have taken a look at the program and found reason to support it.

Forbes pointed out ICANN’s view that the new gTLDs can bring real value to cause-related marketing.  “Cause-related branding is one of the most anticipated consequences of the policy change, ICANN’s spokesman Paul Levins says.”  The most visible example is the group, incuding former U.S. Vice President Al Gore, promoting the gree-focused .eco gTLD.

Even the Financial Times, with its focus on the global business marketplace, is coming to grips with the potential value of the new gTLDs.  In a recent report, the FT noted that “While tensions are high, few dispute that opening up the naming system is a necessary step to creating a more lasting foundation for the internet, and one that will benefit hundreds of millions of users.”

The New York Times has weighed in, too.  The “Newspaper of Record” had a reporter at the ICANN briefing on new gTLDs held recently in New York City.  The result? Theses new gTLD-things might hyave some use afterall the opposition from brand and trademark holers.

“But there is another use for the new top-level domains: simpler Web addresses for companies. Expect to see the likes of .amazon, .ibm and .pepsi. This will let them offer slightly faster ways to get to their various subsections, books.amazon or servers.ibm.”

The ICANN meeting in Sydney gave us both a new head for the Internet’s governing body and a more specific roadmap to the introduction of new gTLDs.  Both are good things, but neither is as meaningful as the subtle but measureable shift in attitude among marketing executives.  Long in lock-step with their lawyers opposed to the new Web landscape, they are now beginning to contemplate the brand value to be found to the right of the dot in a domain name address.

Note this from the Financial Times:

“‘We spend a lot of time and money trying to drive people to websites. Anything that makes it easier to find things on the web is a good thing,’  said Tom Eslinger of Saatchi & Saatchi, the advertising agency.”

It began  with the release of the “Liberalisaton of the Internet” report released last month.  It spread as more companies became even aware of the possibility of owning a branded registry of names and is accelerating as it become clear that the program will include trademark protections adequate to balance the needs of global brands and entrepreneurs.  And the howls that the new gTLDs will lead to consumer confusion has died down because, as we knew all along, search is the dominant Internet roadmap.

When the next (and final?) RFP is issued this Fall, it will bring  into even sharper focus for companies and communities the undeniably positive cost/benefit of operating on the ‘net without having to wear a .com disguise.

In the week since the Gandi.net-sponsored report on ICANN’s proposed program to expand the number of gTLDs hit the streets, the debate over the value of the plan has been actively debated.  We noted, in this space last week, that some voices in support of the new extensions has begun to emerge.

Despite the potential for balance, too many voices in the blogosphere continue to dismiss the who exercise as “confusing to consumers.” The biggest problem this argument has in carrying the day is that hardly anyone has asked the market — except, of course, the Gandi.net interviewers and our own pre-order program.  As reported, about 10,000 names a day were pre-ordered in the first month of the program.

ICANN’s meeting in Sydney begins next week with the gTLD program front-and-center (along with, perhaps, the introduction of the organizations new president).  Perhaps when everyone is in the same place at the same time some sanity can be imposed.

ICANN today stated its decision to “move forward in the implementation of the new gTLD Program while balancing and addressing community concerns on specific aspects of the program.”  Bravo.

But it is also slowing its process, from this year to next year.  In doing so, the Internet guardians of competition, stability and security are reading a script from a turn of last century burlesque.

“Slowly I turned, step-by-step, inch-by-inch…to take my revenge” was a key line in a bit called “Niagara Falls.” In moving slowly, step-by-step, inch-by-inch, ICANN may be hoping to take some of the steam out of heated criticism of brand and trademark holders.  All they have assured themselves of, though, is a chaotic meeting in Sydney.

Unless, rather than continue to put off analysis that can lead to decision, ICANN allows the potential market for gTLDs to help make its point.

Right now, before the new registries are even more than a glint in ICANN’s eye, thousands of people a day are pre-ordering domain names.  Thousands. If ever there were a reason to move more quickly — especially with ICANN counting so much on revenue from the program — this is it.

Rather than hope the furor dies down or otherwise goes away, the mission ought to be to broker quickly a deal that satisfies everyone (or no one)

Wishing won’t make it so.  But ICANN’s wishing might be another homage to burlesque, defined as “a humorous theatrical entertainment involving parody and sometimes grotesque exaggeration.”

Remember when Ross Perot criticized General Motors for being risk averse and decision impaired?  He said if a snake slithered in the board room, rather than kill it right then and there, they’d appoint a committee to study the options.  The same, it seems, can be said of ICANN.

In the face of criticism from brand and trademark holders, the Internet’s guardian for security, stability and competition appointed an Implementation Recommendation Team or IRT to study and offer advice on how to properly introduce new gTLDs.

Even before this IRT train left the station, it drew potent and credible criticism.  It has now offered its draft report.  As some might expect, it is not all that helpful.

Domain Name Wire, a helpful guide to the often dark world of the DNS, called the recommendations “drastic” and they come practically on the eve of the program’s implementation.  More though, and as is often the case, the prescription is bitter and helps only a few.  Note this from the report:

“…(A) Globally Protected Marks List would allow holders of worldwide marks to have them added to a ‘white list’…The requirements to be included are steep: ownership of the trademark issued in at least 90 countries across multiple regions with 200 registrations, must be issued before November 2008, registered the trademark across 50 or more TLDs, and the second level domain for the main company must be identical to the mark.”

If man is the perfect study of man, then the market can be the only perfect study for the demand and use of new gTLDs.  No one is arguing against brand and trademark protections, but to only argue is to let the side with the biggest megaphone dominate.  Even the flawed economic studies offered by ICANN are better evidence than the current “did not/did to” back-and-forth offers.

Let the market decide.  Free the ICANN gTLDs!

As of today, you can pre-order domain names from any new gTLD — those that have been made public or those you think should be created  – right here.

With ICANN giving the world the opportunity to operate vast new areas of the Web to compete with existing registries, like .com, .org and .us, we’re giving you the opportunity to get in early.

Our partner, Pool.com, a leader in domain name acquisition, auction services and secondary market sales, is hosting a dynamic list of gTLDs and is now accepting orders for names within any of them.

The list is “dynamic” because it will expand as communities and corporations announce their plans to apply for a new domain — there are about 50 right now.  And if you see the need for one not yet announced, let us know and we’ll put it on the list.

We think that the enthusiasm for the new web addresses will help prove the business validity of the program.  And by identifying interest in additional extensions we’ll encourage new applicant groups to form.

Placing a pre-order you will get in line now for the best names — names that can best represent you, your business or your special interest. Even better is that there is no fee until the name is secured for your use.

The mobsters in “The Godfather,” when the opposition starts to play rough, “go to the mattresses.“  That is to say they gather for protection without regard to missing dinner with their other families.  If the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is to be believed, it has placed an order for the beds to be delivered.

In a letter of protest to ICANN, the Olympic governing body has told the Internet governing body to obey the rules or face a lawsuit.

This is all a bit over-heated.  We are only at stage two — maybe half-way — in the process for rolling out new gTLDs.  The current revised RFP will lead to a second revision before a final is issued, likely by the end of September.  Of course, ICANN will incorporate brand and trademark protections.  It knows on which side its bread is buttered.  And, it responds to the threat of lawsuits.

But the noise obscures an essential point.  There is real value in the new domains and their names.  There are new businesses to be built.  There are global, commercial communities to form and rally.  And there are existing consumer-facing companies that can accelerate their one-to-one marketing.

It is the last that deserves a bit more attention.  If .amex or .wells or .pge existed, American Express, Wells Fargo and Pacific Gas & Electric could use the domain to create a web presence for each of their customers.  Sure, they could build it off their .com address, but the ability to integrate all their digital initiative in one place that is branded as tightly as those extensions are is a potential value wrong to overlook.

The rights of brand and trademark holders at the second and third levels, like Wells.bank or Amex@credit.card need to be sorted out.  But there is real money to be made.  Forget the mattresses; everyone will get a better night sleep if a deal is struck.

With the wider-ranging media beginning to tell the story of ICANN’s initiative to open up hundreds of new Internet addresses by moving to approve new top level domains (gTLDs), opponants have new fields to plow.  But try as they might, critics of the proposal are far outnumbered by the communities, groups and individuals who see the long-term value in owning a domain, not just renting a name.

The latest example came in USA Today, America’s widely circulated and favorite second read.  The story headlined ‘Turf Wars” and included this message of opposition:

“It costs companies hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, to enforce their trademark rights in the existing space, so imagine how expensive it will be when (a company) gets infringed in a thousand new domains…”  In fact, the behavior of trademark holders and brands is not so clear cut.

For people with vision, it is quite a different picture.  Protections can and are being built in to the process without choking off the potential for real, global, commercial development.  For them, the new gTLD landscape is like a briar patch and they are all Br’er Rabbit just hoping to get thrown in.

ICANN ought to be applauded for creating the opportunity.