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.”

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.

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.”

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.