Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Intellectual Property StrategistKickerFeaturesTopicsSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

Checking in on the New gTLD Objection Processes

By Erin Hennessy, Matt Schneller and Jennifer Ashton
November 30, 2013

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has been busy reviewing applications for new generic top-level domain name registries (new gTLDs), and the first four new gTLDs were delegated to the Root Zone on Oct. 23, 2013.

In the spring of 2013, third parties were able to object to proposed new gTLDs. Objections could be based on one of four grounds:

  1. Prior legal rights, like trademark rights (these objections are handled by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO));
  2. Opposition from a significant portion of the community that the gTLD string targets (handled by the International Center of Expertise of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC));
  3. “Limited public interest,” an objection that the gTLD contradicts generally accepted legal norms of morality and public order under international law (also handled by the ICC); and
  4. “String confusion,” arguing that the new gTLD would be so similar to a pre-existing TLD or to another gTLD application that confusion would be likely to occur (handled by the International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR)).

For more information, and links to the full policies underlying and rules governing each type of objection, see, http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/odr.

Now that ICANN is starting to bring new gTLDs online, it is a good time to review how effective these objection tools have been for opposers. ICANN's database of gTLD objection decisions is available at http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/odr/determination.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions Image

UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?