直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Article

The New gTLDs: Trademark Issues in the Ever Evolving Online Landscape

June 17, 2014

Practising Law Institute

By Douglas A. Rettew

In January 2012, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) opened the application period for new generic top-level domains (gTLDs). Despite the $185,000 cost to submit an application for a new gTLD, ICANN received 1,930 applications.

A top-level domain (TLD) is the portion of a domain name that typically comes last. For instance, in the domain www.BRAND.com, .com is the gTLD, sometimes referred to as the first level domain. The portion that comes before the TLD is referred to as the second-level domain. In the example above, “BRAND” is the second-level domain. If the domain was written www.BRAND.icann.org, “BRAND” would be the third-level domain and “icann” would be the second-level domain.

Although just over three years have passed since the announcement was made to open the Internet to new gTLDs, the landscape surrounding its impact on intellectual property protection, primarily involving trademarks, remains murky. Many brand owners are unsure of the protective measures available for their trademarks, and some are uncertain about whether the economic benefits associated with pursuing new gTLDs will offset the costs.

Before the recent expansion, there were 22 TLDs in existence, including the common .com, .net, .edu, and .org. The stated purpose behind “opening” the Internet to new gTLDs was to free the overcrowded gTLDs, such as .com and .net, allowing for increased opportunities for expression in domain names. The argument goes that with such few gTLDs available, the second-level domain space was becoming overcrowded and consumers entering the domain marketplace were left with sparse options for domain names. Yet, there remains some skepticism about the true motive for the decision, given that organizations such as ICANN stand to gain considerable economic benefit.

Despite the controversy, the program has been immensely popular. In 2014, new gTLD registrations totaled 1.5 million, or 0.5% of global TLD registrations. Reports also predict that by December 2015, gTLD registrations could surpass the 10 million mark. Leading the new gTLDs in domain name creation is .guru with more than 79,000 domains registered under this gTLD thus far. Companies seeking to become registry operators, such as Donuts, have already received significant economic backing and stand poised to profit greatly.

The popularity of the program proves that brand owners cannot afford to ignore it. As the Internet continues to expand, brand owners must formulate a strategy to protect their valuable rights. This article discusses some of the protective mechanisms established for that goal as well as some of the cases that have been brought under them. It also discusses the new United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) regulations regarding the registration of gTLDs.

Downloadable Files

  • TheNewgTLDs_TrademarkIssuesintheEverEvolvingOnlineLandscape

Related Practices

Domain Name Litigation and UDRPs

Trademark and Brand Management

Related Offices

Palo Alto, CA

Washington, DC

Related Professionals

Douglas A. Rettew
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4161
Email

Related Insights

Lecture

IPIC/McGill Summer IP Course 2026: Understanding Trademarks

July 14, 2026

Montreal

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Charitable

TopGolf for the Troops 2026

June 11, 2026

Ashburn

Seminar

3rd AI, IP, & Legal Forum

June 6, 2026

Shangai

Articles

California Reaches Record $12.75 Million CCPA Settlement with General Motors Over Driver Data

June 4, 2026

Conference

17th Summit on Biosimilars & Innovator Biologics

June 2-3, 2026

New York

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: April 2026

June 1, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Consistency Is Key – USPTO Issues Three New Informative Decisions

May 29, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a    
§ 325(d) EPR Denial

May 28, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP