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.

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!

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.