Home >> History, Ideology & Science >> Science and Technology

     Email   Print 

ICAAN and gTLDs: Revolt and Fantasy

Naseem Javed - 10/31/2011

I. A Made Up Fantasy and the ICANN GTLD Reality

Gary Elliot, chairman of the Association of National Advertisers and vice president of global marketing at Hewlett-Packard, wrote a column in Advertising Age titled "ICANN's Promises Aren't Simply Speculation, They're Outright Fantasy" http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/icann-s-promises-simply-speculation-outright-fantasy/229594/

His arguments opposing ICANN gTLDs are similar to the other heads of various advertising associations around the world.

While the main powerbrokers of the global advertising sector are mum, their association heads are using the same circulated message of cyber-squatting fears without any solid proof. Here is my analysis and an open challenge to the trade.Elliot writes, "By every calculation I've seen, including estimates by ICANN's own experts, it will cost companies like mine hundreds of thousands of dollars to police their trademarks regardless of whether they decide to participate and buy a branded domain or register on other new generic domains, e.g., .computer. Those costs, when weighted against the purported benefits promised, simply don't add up."

Let's assume one spends $500,000 plus months in legal formalities to obtain "dot computer" with intentions to go after Hewlett-Packard.computer or hp.computer as some kind of power play in the market place. To begin, what's the real value of "dot computer" anyway? Does this generic word really warrant all this effort? Here the glaring problem of nomenclature is staring straight at us: not each and every generic term is worth the gTLD struggle. At what stage do those unfounded claims of billions of dollars in legal and protective expenses come into play?

Irrespective, this so-called big threat already exists in simple domain names today. If this term is so hot a property why are domain names in various combinations like www.hpcomputer.com already readily available today for few dollars?Furthermore, in either case, HP can use trademark protection measures to remedy such a situation.

The company may, however, boldly reject the first-come-no-questions-asked domain name policy. He may consider acknowledging that this clause alone is solely responsible for over 10,000 "Uniform Domain-Name Dispute- Resolution Programs" where disputing parties submits thousands of dollars in costs to lawyers. But can he demand that ICANN cancel the entire domain name system and halt the Internet? The current
domain name system, despite its problems, has provided amazing billing opportunities in trademark conflicts and digital branding to ad agencies. The new gTLD approach is a logical and rightful nomenclature evolution towards global cyber-branding expansion.

This subject of corporate nomenclature at this level of global naming complexity is neither taught at world's leading univerities nor discussed in top MBA courses. AARM www.aarm.org research shows that less than 2% marketing executives have any idea about gTLD and would not be able to articulate the subject in any way without any formal study.

Elliot further adds, "One only needs to look at the 'success' of the last string of new TLDs ICANN introduced in the past 10 years " .biz, .info, .travel, .jobs, .tel, .name, .coop, .museum, and .mobi " to see that ICANN's promises are not just speculation but are, in fact, fantasy."

What amount of earth-shattering cyber-squatting did these poor performance gTLDs cause? Would it have turned out differently if they were mega successes? What specific name would pose a threat to Hewlett-Packard? Who really wants "HewlettPackard.travel"? Who wants to be the cyber-squatter owner of www.HP.name? What is the real value of this name chase?

The real truth on the other side is that these poor performance gTLDs from the start were the product of "extremely distressed and restricted releases." A slow, painful and extremely expensive delivery process while registrars dreamed of dotcom type runaways.The name selection understanding between ".pro" over ".law" was never an option, so someone resorted to park all professionals under a single roof of ".pro."
Real-life global naming doesn't work like this.

Other gTLD name choices were simply accidental; .name or .me were supposed to say "what name" or "what me" to achieve what? The applicants have learned an important lesson: the more open the name, the poorer the results. This new game is more sophisticated, demanding a sharper understanding of global naming.

Elliot's trepidations do not measure up to the limited elasticity concerning the legendary name of his own company Hewlett-Packard, which as a dot brand may not carry the sex appeal for being too long and in two parts. The abbreviated version of dot HP would not be allowed under ICANN naming rules. Two letters are restricted to country TLDs, like "in" for India and "jp" for Japan. Why HP would need ".hp" in the first place? They already own www.hp.com. Unless ".hp" needs a special "customer-touch-point" sub-domain system to reach out to thousands of distributors worldwide under a master gTLD plan, they will have to address
all these naming technicalities.

With or without new gTLDs, the ongoing fears of some other smarter name or dot brand circling Hewlett Packard's space is always a possibility. This is a common challenge for every major marketer around the world. Therefore, how you play the nomenclature game and enforce a name identity in the global mindshare is the real challenge.

When all the possibilities of gTLDs are measured up in creating dot brand, generic brands, destination brands the wide range of opportunities point more towards intricate and colorful naming while cyber-squatting only appears to be as normal a threat as it already exists. This of course is the reality.

II. Fear Factor: The ICAAN Domain Revolt

The unison flash mob dance by the world's most powerful groups of agencies against ICANN's new gTLD domain name program must not be taken lightly. After all, these global bodies represent the real persuaders of emotions. They influence our taste, habits and behavior, like mix of cereal, length of the skirts, width of ties all the way to commercials and reality shows that teach us how to role play in cubicles or dance at weddings. They are the advertisers, public relationists, market researchers and logo-slogan centric magicians. They have successfully taught us commercialization and modernism, always showed us brighter and colorful ways but currently in throws with reckless hyper-consumerism going through some depressive tumultuous times.

What they not see in the ICANN's new gTLD domain name system and what these nostalgic Mad Men so afraid off? Is it really that fear factor? The gTLD issues over years have percolated broiled and roasted around the world in huge open public grilling. Why now so suddenly the spring of opposition demanding regime change at best?

In Support of Opposition

Some of the panic buttons for top established brands and their agencies are the eruption of 'name fortification' example, a Telco acquires 'dot cell,' 'dot mobile,' 'dot call' etc. and fortifies their current brand while creating a barrage of digital campaign against a particular well established name brand. In right hands a gTLD is surely a game changer. Imagine the colorful maze where hundreds of mega brands create their own 'brand new stars' and set the stage where galaxies start to collide. Sure this may happen as it did when first domain names were introduced. Old established brands were pulled out along roots. So many sectors
got changed or wiped out overnight while far too many blossomed. As a global cyber name brand marketing weapon a gTLD can provide very powerful action.

The other issue is for holders of 'mega-dot-com-brands' about the emergence of 'better and sharper dot brand names' with wider capability to expand on 'customer touch points'. Truly, what will happen if Expedia.com, ETrade.com, Travelocity.com or EBay.com were confronted with a better dot brand name with more magic directly threatening their base while replicating profusely with unlimited sub-name-brands
overnight around the world? A gTLD offers the fastest and the cheapest tools for the right combination to expand the base and catapult into next stratosphere.

ICANN took years to build this program but only allocated few months for the advertisers to sort all this out. But on the other hand, what if agencies were asked 20 years ago to accept the domain name? The fear factor would be equally immense as early domain names too crushed the very old, and at times most cherished models. The domain names rapidly evolved all by themselves without any advertising campaign and quickly engulfed the world without mercy. Although they changed the landscape but overall created wonders for the world at large. The magic is still unfolding every second as we live in a digitally mobile and interconnected world. Irrespective it makes a great topic for the boardrooms as January 12th 2012 comes closer. On this date ICANN will accept applications of proposed names from around the world? The global race is on and we need to explore the key issues.

The Fear Factor

Lack of Power Play: A gTLD is primarily a powerful cyber branding class act for larger brands skating on regional or global landscape. The more you digitally compress a traditional campaign the more its brand name identity becomes fluid and rises on the global cyber-branding stage, reducing dependency on traditional advertising support. Remember a time, when in order to make an impact, a synchronized series of hundred full page newspaper ads were needed around the world on a same days, this now can be achieved instantly, repeated endlessly and all for a fraction of cost.

Imagine if thousands of big brands acquired new gTLDs and their hyper name identity expansion was all domain name management driven while fees were directed to ICANN, domain name registries, registrars, Google Ad words, SEOs etc. What special role would be left for the ad agencies to play in this space? The study form ABC Namebank already points to some 18,700 organizations worldwide that may directly profit from this gTLD platform whereby tens of billions in new revenue may get directed to domain services sectors. Would agencies be sidelined or become new owners of domain registrars to have their power play?

The Advanced Name Games: The winners and losers of the gTLD application will be ultimately determined by true powers of the proposed names. Some very established name brands, regional or global may not be able to qualify. When you start to accept 'one internet one world' a new thinking of 'one name one owner' towards market domination via name identity appears to be very desirous. The force of logo-slogan centric hammer at every branding exercise at most agencies precludes them from tackling the global corporate nomenclature complexities. In their mandate name identities are never the ultimate drivers of image positioning but the logos and slogans are.

It worked wonders during the last century. There is nothing so complicated about this topic as its simplicity resides in the volumes of pages of major international trade directories where identical and similar names gasps in tight columns. Are these the reasons for senior marketer and brand pushers to be quiet on the gTLD naming issues while their own associations are parading with paper Mache monsters chanting of cyber squatting?

This century, the digital compression on global cyber branding is forcing the name identity to do all the heavy lifting and gTLD further accentuate their power. The new gTLD approach is a logical and rightful nomenclature evolution towards global cyber name branding expansions. This subject of corporate nomenclature at this level of global naming complexity is neither taught at world's leading universities nor discussed in top MBA courses. AARM http://www.aarm.org research shows that less than 2% marketing executives have any idea about gTLD and would not be able to articulate the subject in any way without any formal study.

Wired Hub of Horror

Among the developed nations fears of one internet and one world is slowly growing; where some 3 billion online users would create a round the clock global pulse of opinion, more powerful than any single nation could withstand. The world like a fluid interconnected ocean, hyper digitized social and mobile media, and search engine dependent society devouring information via personalized interaction is steadily crushing the old medium. All communications whether corporate, public, social or political will all face new forces of change on a global scale. The real change cometh; internet will mature further and take some sudden swipes at our traditional practices.

The gTLD now shakes the tree by pushing the global cyber nomenclature issues to the top of the agenda. The Googlized and AD word dependent marketing has also pointed out that we are simply driven by name identities. The search engine model has divided the global corporate nomenclature into good workable and expandable names or duds. What does this all mean to brand owners and creative services? Can brand holders adjust fast; are they ready to accept a 3 billion online universe of a one internet one world?

Can they recognize the ultimate goal of 'one name one owner' as currently enjoyed by less 1% brand name owners of the world? Will they now acknowledge the hidden cost saving powers of the Five Star Standard of Naming http://www.fivestarstandard.com Will they become just good spectators or emerge as real game changers?

Why name evaluation should the next big hush-hush word in the boardrooms? Only those organizations that can boldly face the obvious and hidden strengths and weaknesses of their current names can truly cope with future in light of the new global cyber name complexities. The fear factors created by half knowledge are just part of the learning process while the successful image of name brands all over the world in the future will be increasingly and primarily driven by the power of their name. This point alone is contentious enough to demand an open debate. What's your move?