NEW YORK -- What's at stake for travel industry dot-coms if
dot-travel becomes a new top-level domain (TLD)? Many have not even
considered the issue.
At Travelocity.com, said to be the largest on-line travel
site, general counsel Andy Steinberg said he was just learning
about the dot-travel development.
"We have such a widely recognized brand name, and I can't think
of us changing our name to Travelocity.travel," Steinberg said. "We
haven't studied this yet ... [but] it might make it more difficult
to find travel sites like Travelocity.com, Expedia.com and sites
that cross over."
In separate interviews, trademark lawyers Christopher Schulte of
Meagher & Geer and Tim Kenny of Fulbright & Jaworski, both
in Minneapolis, concurred that .com will remain the most important
TLD.
"Specialized TLDs will make it easier for consumers to locate
specialized options," Kenny said.
For newer companies or those with defined product lines, new
TLDs might enable more firms to register domain names and to
attract more hits, Kenny said.
Companies with famous trademarks, like United Airlines, for
instance, will have more trouble policing the integrity of their
brands because another business might try to register United.biz or
United.kids, Kenny said.
On the first day that new TLDs are approved, he added, large
companies will try to register their names under each new TLD, he
said.
"It's up to each company to decide about their brand," said
Schulte, who specializes in helping trademark-holders clear and
register domain names. "There's no requirement to switch."
Given the laser speeds of the Internet, Schulte also questioned
whether a six-letter TLD like '.travel' would be practical when
most TLDs are three.
Several analysts predicted that the Internet Corp. for Assigned
Names and Numbers (ICANN) will use a deliberate approach in
approving new TLDs.
"For technical and marketing reasons, ICANN is likely to approve
just a handful of new TLDs in its November meeting," said
International Data Corp.'s Jonathan Gaw, who follows the issue as
research manager for consumer e-commerce.
"I believe that .travel and other industry-specific domains may
be introduced in the future, but I doubt that it will happen this
year. There are just too many industries out there, and ICANN is
unlikely to pick just a handful of them and exclude others," Gaw
said.
"I think it is more likely that ICANN will go with broader, more
generic TLDs like .store or .web."
What's the fuss about top-level domains?
To begin with, there are only seven of them: .com, .edu, .net,
.org, .int, .gov and .mil. The Internet also makes use of some 200
country-code TLDs like .us and .uk.
Appearing the farthest to the right in a domain name, TLDs were
instituted in the mid-1980s as a substitute for users having to
type in and remember clunkier Internet Protocol numbers.
In July, ICANN agreed to the U.S. government plan to supervise
the international acceptance of new TLDs.
The reasons they are needed are two-fold: 1) the seven generic
TLDs can't handle the volume of potential domain-name registrations
and 2) .com, .net and .org were originally for commercial, network
provider and non-profit uses, respectively, but now are used for
any purpose. Hence there is no clarity for users in identifying the
types of Web sites they are accessing.
ICANN has 44 active applications for possible new TLDs, but the
organization is likely to accept fewer than 10, said Jonathan Gaw,
research manager of consumer e-commerce for the International Data
Corp. in Mountain View, Calif.
There is no guarantee, Gaw added, that dot-travel will be among
the new TLDs when the decision is made next month.
Asked whether one applicant, like IATA, will be allowed to
oversee a new TLD, the IDC research manager said: "I don't think
that will happen."
New TLDs, he said, "could open up a can of worms" regarding
trademark and brand issues. For example, how would it be decided if
American Airlines received American.travel or whether it went to
another travel business with American in the name.
"The most significant part of this is sorting out the trademark
implications," said Gaw of IDC. "Companies will have to stake their
ground as quickly as they can."