According to Xbiz.com,  “Kenya’s government announced today that it has rejected .XXX to operate in its country”

“Communications Secretary Bitange Ndemo said Kenya would not certify the sponsored top-level domain that was recently approved by the ICANN.”

“We are not going to allow .XXX in this country; it’s actually a certificate for people to watch pornography,” Ndemo said.

“Some countries have that freedom but parents have the responsibility of stopping their children from accessing these sites,” Ndemo said. “Most parents in Kenya are not Internet savvy unlike their children so such material would not be controlled.”

If you check out the Xbiz link above you can watch a video of the Communications Secretary chatting about blocking .xxx

Consistent with last week’s announcement by WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization), the National Arbitration Forum (FORUM) based in Minneapolis, MN, announced that 2,177 cases were filed in its domain name dispute resolution program in 2010.  This number represents a 24 percent increase from 2009 (1,759 cases) and 23 percent over 2008 (1,770 cases).  Of the over 2,100 UDRP cases filed, 96.6% involved generic top-level domain (gTLD) names including .com, .net and .org.  Approximately 70 cases involved a .us top-level domain under the United States Dispute Resolution Policy (usDRP).  

But what exactly does this data actually mean? FORUM and WIPO are the two approved providers for domain name dispute resolution services under policies like the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) implemented by ICANN in 1999.  And the question really is, “How effective are companies at protecting their brand through the UDRP?” 

The companies that do have an online brand enforcement strategy and use the UDRP to recover domains that are damaging their brand(s) the most are quite successful.  In about 75% of these cases, the Respondent does not even reply to a domain dispute and the Complaint wins UDRP cases over 90% percent of the time, regaining web traffic, ending customer confusion, and sending cyber pirates looking for easier targets.

To learn more about best practices when developing an online brand enforcement strategy or to receive a free brand monitoring analysis of your brand, you can contact us at Safenames US, +1.703.574.5313 and nasales@safenames.net, or the Safenames UK at +44 1908 200022 and emeasales@safenames.net.

Related posts:

1. Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) for Domain Name filings increase 28% in 2010
2. Domain Name Piracy: Why do so few Companies Put Up a Fight?
3. Safenames Wins Domain Dispute On Personal Name Without a Registered Trademark

Recently in a CircleID blog, Alexa Raad, CEO of Architelos pointed out that applying for a new Top-Level Domain (TLD) is an expensive and lengthy process, costing an estimated $500K for application and various legal and professional services and that is assuming there is no other applications for the same string, nor any objection to the string being filed.

Ms. Raad pointed out that one of the biggest profit centers for any new gTLD will be the proper placement and sale of its premium domains.

Alexa writes:

“If the TLD presents a viable opportunity for capitalizing on premium names, then the key consideration is the size and value of the premium name inventory, and the right timing for releasing various batches into the market.”

” This can be used to stimulate awareness and generate additional cash for investment back into the registry to support other costs such as security, product development or simply additional marketing funds.”

Consider strings such as .Law, .Health, .Green, .Shop, .Site, which are effectively generic keywords as TLD strings,  the inventory of premium names for each would be different and requires a credible analysis of not only size and valuation, but also the choice(s) of appropriate channel(s) and timing for release.

The PR and marketing strategy behind each would also be different depending on whether the string was a brand or a generic.

Bottom line The premium domain sales strategy and success can make up much of the initial profit the registry can make initially and continue for years after.

So it is a worthwhile investment to develop a credible and thorough business case that evaluates among the items mentioned in her blog?

Is there a premium names opportunity and if so, what is the size?

Should there be more than one phase of Land Rush and Sunrise?

If so at what prices?

The higher the landrush price the less applications there will be meaning possibly less revenue on average for the land rush auction domains.

A lower land rush fee will probably result in more auctions but will the total revenue be higher overall taking into account auciton premiums and land rush application fees?

Finally can you recoup your costs for sunrise verification by correctly pricing your application fees?

This is in part why Monte Cahn and myself launched RightOftheDot.com

RIGHTOFTHEDOT.com is partnering with Architelos to jointly conduct a series of free webinars titled  “Everything you ever wanted to know about a TLD business case, but did not know to ask.”

This joint Webinar will not only cover the basics of a TLD business using the Business Case Builder tool Architelos has developed, but we will also delve deeper into the issues around premium names and Sunrise/Landrush decisions.

If you would like to be invited to this webinar series simply contact us at info@RIGHTOFTHEDOT.com.

The ICANN Board of Directors held their Board Meeting in San Francisco at the conclusion of the “Silicon Valley Public Meeting”. In a major development, the Board, for the first time, provided a timeline for approving the new Top Level Domain applicant guidebook.

The Board stated it will hold a special meeting on June 20^th to review the guidebook just prior to the start of the ICANN’s “Singapore Public Meeting”.

There are still some hurdles that must be overcome, such as the differences with Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), but feedback from the GAC is expected by March 25. Once feedback has been given, the final GAC scorecard for constituency comment is expected by April 15 with a public comment period ending May 15. On May 20, the GAC and the Board will have a teleconference to discuss the final scorecard. If all goes according to plan, the final guidebook will be posted May 30 and the board will consider it for approval on June 20.

If approved in June there will be a four (4) month communication period to the global Internet community before the application process would begin. Under the current timeline published by ICANN, the application period for new gTLDs could begin in October 2011, with delegation of new gTLD strings into the root zone in the 2^nd quarter of 2012.

Safenames will continue to keep you updated as we learn more about new developments with the new gTLD program.

If you would like to apply for a TLD for your brand or have any questions regarding new gTLDs and the ICANN application process, please contact your Safenames account manager.

You may also contact the Safenames UK office at +44 1908 200022 and emeasales@safenames.net, or the Safenames US office at +1.703.574.5313 and nasales@safenames.net.

Related posts:

1. ICANN Board and GAC to Meet: Final Hurdle for New gTLDs?
2. ICANN posts new TLD Applicant Guidebook – Could Approval for new Domain Extensions be next?
3. ICANN Board approves plan to begin accepting new gTLD applications in May 2011

UPDATE 02/18/2010 12:47pm: We have confirmed these findings to be correct.

It has often been asserted by trademark holders that the new round of gTLDs will have a major and catastrophic financial impact on brands.

But beyond these alarmist statements, is there any empirical evidence to either back this up, or to prove it false?

After examining all UDRP cases done by WIPO and the NAF, sorted by TLD, the evidence shows that new gTLDs play a very minor role in UDRPs, and that to the extent that a TLD matters, .com more prone to infringement than other, newer gTLDs. Infringements, as measured by UDRPs filed (regardless of outcome), show that infringement broadly correlate to the number of domains registered in a TLD zone, and not to the newness or recency of a TLD.

The study also predicts that if 300 new TLDs were created (an estimate made by several observers, including ICANN), there would be 316 new additional UDRPs filed. When combined with the new Uniform Rapid Suspension provisions that will be required for new gTLDs, these cases would result in a total additional cost to trademark holders of $869,000, or less than $.10 per trademark registered worldwide.

The data shows that, for enforcement via UDRP and URS, assertions that brand holders would be faced with enormous costs have been substantially overestimated.

Read the study.

Cedric at Nom de Domaine has posted this Italian language article on the European Parliament’s recommendation for a .kid TLD.

Today, the story has been picked up in a number of publications.

EU Backs Plan For .kid TLD (TheRegister) – Sept. 8
Redux: European Parliament Proposes .kid Internet Domain (CircleID) – Sept. 8
EU Proposes .kid Domain (AustralianIT) – Sept. 8