As the online world turns its attention to ICANN’s upcoming meeting in Sydney there is an emerging reappraisal of the potential brand value of new gTLDs.

The program to expand the Internet’s addressable real estate has been under intense criticism from brand and trademark holders.  Clearly, there ought to be appropriate protections, but we have shown that there is demand for the new names.

Now we are beginning to see evidence of interest in the new domains by the brand and trademark holders, too.  A long-awaited report on “The Liberalisation of the Internet” from The Future Laboratory for French registrar Gandi.net offers an in-depth view of the potential of new gTLDs, including this:

“(T)wo-thirds of businesses don’t realise domain extensions are being liberalised next year. But those businesses that do know about this (like Deloitte) are excited about the opportunities in the areas of global branding.”

On almost the same day, Irfan Salim, CEO of MarkMonitor, “the global leader in enterprise brand protection” took up the same point.

The report at ComputerWeekly.com, he is credited with offering real brand balance to the caution:

“(a new gTLD) also allowed them to use the domain name, which is theirs exclusively, to build a close-knit community by requiring their affiliates to register their own domain names under their GTLD.”

Salim may not be Irish, but he is well-versed in appropriate Irish proverbs; “In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.”

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!

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.

As a member of ICANN’s Business Constituency I have heard first-hand the perfectly appropriate criticisms from trademark holders of ICANN’s roll-out of new generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs). But while it may be OK for branded companies to wish they didn’t have to deal with the matter, the dust that has been kicked up has obscured real value in the program.

The new gTLDs give us the chance to create global marketplaces based on communities of interest. Think about it. For a city promoting tourism, visitors no longer will need to troll thatcityhotel.com or thatcityrestaurant.net or thatcitytransit.ca. It can all be assembled at .thatcity. The metaphor is even more powerful for active, global communities that could rally around domains like .golf or .art or .music (yes, I know there is a group working on that one!).

There are plenty of mechanisms in place to deal with those who would seek to lever a brand they do not own. The community can agree to more if it chooses; the structure is in place for that, too.

But to paint the launch of a host of new gTLDs with a tar brush of trademark criticism is to ignore the chance to create new global markets based on communities of interest.

I am a believer in brands and community.

Please Note: This post was originally published on Feb 12, 2009 on CircleID.