To Apply or Not to Apply for a dotBrand in 2026

Longtime domain name strategy and online brand protection expert Jeanette Eriksson explores the critical considerations for brands evaluating dotBrand applications in 2026. Drawing on insights from industry veterans, she examines the strategic benefits of owning a branded TLD, the psychological barriers that can derail decision-making, lessons learned from the previous application round, and the cross-functional preparation required to make this rare opportunity count.

Applying for a dotBrand TLD is a strategic way to manage a brand’s online presence. However, it is a unique and time-sensitive opportunity.

This is only the second time in Internet history that brand owners can apply for their own branded TLD, and considering the time it took to get here (more than one decade since the last round!), brand owners may want to make evaluating this option a priority. It likely won’t reappear anytime soon, let’s put it that way. 

Luckily, this time around, we have experience from the last round to help guide the process even further. In this article, we pick the brains of some highly experienced experts in the field of dotBrand application and management, to identify: 

• the benefits and key reasons to apply;
• lessons learned and common pitfalls from the last round;
• the psychology that can impact assessment; and
• things to be aware of beyond the decision of whether to apply. 

The next dotBrand round is (finally) happening and time is of the essence

The application window for the next round of new gTLD and dotBrand applications is expected to run from 30 April 2026 to 12 August 2026. 

The Applicant Guidebook (AGB) lays out the rules, requirements and evaluation mechanics. Andreas Soll, manager of corporate domain solutions at Questel, recommends: “Those applying for their own dotBrand must understand the AGB as a real working framework: high formal requirements, extensive evidence, and detailed policies that consume internal time and often require external consultants.” 

“Understanding the application questions and what ICANN is actually looking for will make the difference between a strong application and one that never gets off the ground. For most organizations, that means starting now, not later,”  he advises. 

Some brands may wonder whether it’s already too late in the game to apply. The answer is: no, not yet. Let’s begin with identifying the key benefits of owning a dotBrand.

Top four arguments for applying

Few people have articulated the strategic case for dotBrands as clearly as Ben Crawford, CEO of Markmonitor Group. Crawford outlines the four pillars that consistently resonate with boardrooms and budget owners:

1. From an IP perspective, a dotBrand is a unique, universal IP class that can only be obtained during a short window, and which can be retained under an unassailable contract in perpetuity. For companies that take IP seriously, it is something they typically want to secure.

2. From an IT operations and marketing point of view, your dotBrand gives you the ability to create and use infinite domain names using virtually any terms you wish, unrestricted, uncontested, instantly and at virtually no cost.

3 From a security angle, a dotBrand gives your team additional end-to-end visibility and control of their domain names, without reliance on third-party registries, which in some instances have security vulnerabilities and even histories of being hacked.

4. Online brand protection professionals support dotBrand domains as a powerful weapon in their ongoing war against cybersquatters, impersonators, phishers, counterfeiters and other online scammers. A dotBrand TLD means a domain name can be trusted by customers: if the company name is to the right of the dot, you can be certain it's an authentic domain name.

However, Crawford also stresses neutrality and emphasises that the ultimate decision to apply or not always remains fully with each brand.

“Our role is never to persuade a company to get a dotBrand, but rather to help them determine if it’s right for them, and to help them put together the business case that underpins their decision – whether that is to get dotBrands or not,” Crawford says. 

“In the corporate world you need a good consultant to help you document your decision-making process,” he continues. “After that it’s down to the company: sometimes the general counsel and the CISO fully understand the benefits and want the dotBrand, but the CFO shoots it down as an austerity measure. We can help escalate the conflict and support big-picture thinking, but in the end the clients set their own priorities.”

This underscores an important point: choosing not to apply is also a highly valid and strategic decision, provided that it is explicitly made, rather than implicitly drifted into. 

According to Soll, it is not too late to consider a dotBrand, but the clock is ticking and certain things should be prioritized at this time:

“First, lock down governance: a product owner with a mandate, a steering group across legal, security, marketing and IT, and concrete starting use cases with owners, timelines and KPI targets,” he says.

Let’s have a closer look at these key aspects: 

• cross-team alignment;
• investment considerations; and
• use cases.

Leadership alignment is key

If there is one thing to remember, it’s that leadership alignment is everything. 

Daniel Greenberg, CEO of Lexsynergy, explains that “internal consultation with stakeholders is essential”. 

“Strong leadership buy-in is critical to ensure continuity and commitment throughout the process, from application to delegation,” Greenberg says. “One of the primary reasons many previous dotBrand initiatives failed was the lack of sustained leadership and the departure of key project advocates who originally drove the initiative.”

Applying for, and using, a dotBrand TLD touches many departments within an organization – legal, marketing, IT, security, and finance. 

Therefore, if a key stakeholder does not understand what a dotBrand is, or cannot clearly see how it benefits or impacts their specific area of responsibility, it is only natural for the immediate response to be sceptical with a preference for the status quo – also known as ‘ambiguity aversion’. 

The concept is that people often choose the alternative that appears clearer and more predictable over an option with a more ambiguous outcome, even if the latter might have a bigger upside. 

Providing insight, information and a clear practical vision is crucial to overcoming this potential hurdle, along with creating a sense of ownership in the project for the relevant stakeholders. All of this ties back to the importance of cross-departmental and expert-guided initial assessments. 

Greenberg highlights the same fact that Crawford underscored: going through the exercise of evaluating this opportunity fully, and documenting the process and final decision, even if the decision is not to apply, is incredibly valuable.

Greenberg says: 

Establishing a dotBrand is both expensive and time consuming. It requires thorough internal communication, planning, and alignment. Now is the time to engage in meaningful consultation and planning. Even if the eventual decision is not to proceed with a dotBrand application, the organization will have achieved valuable internal consensus and documented feedback on the matter. This record can be referenced in future decision-making cycles, particularly if leadership changes or perspectives evolve after the application window closes. Understanding the rationale behind a previous decision provides a foundation for reassessment when the next opportunity arises. Ultimately, ignoring the process is not a strategy; making an informed decision is.

Closely related to this process is that of understanding and framing the investment.

A dotBrand is a long-term strategic asset, not a domain name registration 

This is where many organizations struggle, because a dotBrand is not just a “bigger domain”. It’s an infrastructure asset, and it’s not a cheap one. The application fee is set to $227,000. On top of that, brands will need to budget for attorney fees, consultants, registry operations, marketing costs and other related expenses. 

Alexandra Zins, director of consulting and policy at FairWinds (now part of Com Laude), highlights the tension that many organizations face when translating theoretical value into budget approvals. Most companies are used to paying modest annual fees for domain names. A dotBrand does not fit into that mental model at all, but then again, it’s not supposed to.

As she explains: “You aren’t just buying a dotBrand to use in the next few years, but to reserve it for all possible future use cases five, 10, 20 years down the line.”

That reframing is important because the far-reaching benefits of a dotBrand typically show up slowly, while the high costs for those benefits appear suddenly. 

In other words, the ambiguity aversion applies to the unknown value and implications of the investment, whereas, for the benefits that have been identified and clearly communicated, temporal discounting may come into play. 

This essentially means that the benefits that have been communicated and are known to the decision maker (eg, the effects of enhanced control, security, long-term brand infrastructure and marketing opportunities) may be heavily discounted in perceived value because they won’t be felt immediately. 

This can make the immediate cost of investing in a dotBrand seem high compared to the perceived (subconsciously discounted) value, resulting in a preference for “status quo” or a “let’s wait and see” approach. 

This is a hard psychological challenge to overcome, but being aware of it can put us in charge of it. 

One way to counteract the bias is to break down the process into smaller milestones, which allows for more and quicker wins. Another is to clearly communicate and identify the step-by-step plan, financial roadmap, and well-defined use case(s). 

Thomas Wells, VP of consulting services at FairWinds, captures the nature of this long-term commitment. “A dotBrand TLD is a long-term strategic asset, not an annual or short-term commitment,” he says. 

“While domain name registrations renew yearly and often feel transactional, a dotBrand requires sustained investment, cross-functional alignment, and a multi-year roadmap. The benefits – enhanced security, brand trust, marketing innovation, and operational control – accrue over time, not instantly.”

Steve Levy, long-time trademark and domain name attorney and UDRP panelist, adds a dose of realism. “Getting a dotBrand may be the end-goal of one process, but it’s only the beginning of another,” he notes. 

“Companies will want to realize the most return on their investments, and so they should be motivated to transition their digital ecosystems to this new asset. This will involve committing the needed tech resources and convincing all stakeholders – customers, employees, suppliers, and other business partners – that there’s value in switching to the new dotBrand.”

The use-case challenge

The third piece in the preparation puzzle is avoiding pitfalls seen in the previous round and understanding why relatively few active uses of dotBrand TLDs aren’t necessarily indicative of their value and relevance today. 

Most providers and consultants indicate a great level of interest from brands in exploring whether a dotBrand is right for them. But whether we’ll end up seeing more, or fewer, actual applications in this round compared to the last, remains to be seen. 

One issue commonly pointed out – and which is likely to come up in internal discussions – is the relatively small pool of great use cases of dotBrands stemming from the last round. This was the result of multiple factors. Stuart Fuller, chief commercial officer at Com Laude, explains:

One of the reasons that organizations may not see the value in an application in the forthcoming round is that they cannot see compelling use cases or strong examples of where global brands are adopting a dotBrand. There are some examples, but in many industries, there are simply no brands using them (food and beverage, for instance). This was because many applicants were driven to apply to protect their brand and had no other use cases. Some of the stakeholder teams who drove the business case then left, and the TLD was moved to IP or tech. This time around, there’s more of a focus on active use and there are new, global brands that are engaged, especially in fintech.

Chris Niemi, manager of strategic initiatives at Markmonitor, echoes that sentiment and points to institutional memory as a key lesson learned, tying things back to the previously mentioned benefit of well-documented assessment processes and decisions.

“In the last round, processes took so long that key staff often left for other roles, so a lot of organizations lost sight of the reason they had applied for the dotBrand in question,” Niemi notes. “In many cases, this led to lack of organizational focus, which eventually resulted in decisions to terminate dotBrands which was a loss of time, money, and effort for the entity as a whole.”

“Keep records and develop an ‘institutional memory’ about why decisions were made, what use cases were planned for use, the successes of implementations, and other related history to make sure that the organization can continue to support its investment,” Niemi advises.

Considering these insights from the last round gives brand owners entering into this round a crucial advantage and opportunity to turn the assessment and/or application process into a long-term successful endeavor for their organization. 

Trademarks, contention sets and reveal day

To get started, Fuller advises brands to prioritize five things at this time: 

1. Understand what you can apply for, and what the risks are associated with that keyword/brand – is it blocked by ICANN, is there already a singular or plural version of it, what are the chances of someone else applying, and the most important thing – does the applicant own the trademark?

2. Establish a cross-functional team – ensure all relevant functions have an input into how the TLD will be used internally and externally. Appoint a project lead who will be the point of liaison with the internal team and external advisers.

3. Appoint an expert external consultancy who can guide you through the process from end to end, who understands the nuances of the ICANN application, evaluation and delegation process. They can also help you in choosing third-party providers such as the registry service provider and data escrow partner.

4. Create a business plan and look to secure the budget as early as possible. The finance team will know how the application fee can be accounted for.

5. Create the use case scenarios and communicate, communicate, communicate.

Closely related to item #1 above, FairWinds’s Wells places further emphasis on the need for a trademark and valid SMD file as a non-negotiable, foundational requirement. 

He also encourages brands to prepare a strategy for “reveal day” and alternate strings. 

“Reveal day” is the day when ICANN will make the list of all applied-for strings public, along with information about who applied for what. 

Zins adds: 

In the 2012 round, applicants were encouraged to work together to find solutions to their contention sets. This resulted in side deals, buy-outs, and joint ventures. In 2026, applicants in contention will be banned from communicating with each other about their applications. This will significantly change the prep work that needs to be done prior to the application opening. Applicants should work to identify possible sources of contention and leverage every possible avenue to avoid it. Otherwise, you risk ending up in an ICANN-hosted auction bidding for your desired TLD.

One way to avoid ending up in an auction is, as previously pointed out, to include an alternate string in the dotBrand application, which can be used if the primary string ends up being applied for by other applicants as well. 

Objections

Brands are well advised to keep an eye on the list of applied-for strings, once revealed. This goes for both dotBrands and gTLDs. 

In particular, two kinds of objections can be filed if needed, depending on the situation:

• Legal rights objections (LROs) – brands can challenge a string that may infringe existing legal rights.
• String confusion objections (SCOs) – applicants can object to a string that is confusingly similar to an existing TLD or applied-for string.

WIPO has been appointed the exclusive provider of LROs and SCOs. 

Brian Beckham, head of Internet dispute resolution at WIPO, stresses the importance of these procedures. 

“They represent the only opportunity a brand owner has to prevent a string that infringes its rights from being delegated,” he states. 

“Once ICANN allows a new gTLD to go live, that registry operator can allocate second-level domains that need to be monitored. It is important to point out here, though, that in the prior round, for brands whose trademark was also a dictionary term, those objections did not succeed because the new gTLD applicant pointed to the dictionary meaning as the purpose behind its application,” Beckham continues. “We published a report on the cases in the last round that should be considered mandatory reading for anyone considering a LRO.”

Don’t forget the bigger picture

Moving further along on the timeline, for those that end up applying for, and launching, their own dotBrand TLD, being strategic about how potential dotBrand domains are used alongside other domain names in open TLDs is something that should not be overlooked. 

This includes bearing in mind that some Internet users will still reflexively look for the ‘.com’ site (or whichever TLD was previously used for a brand’s official website). 

Therefore, setting up similar matching domains and redirects for the time being is something that Google Registry, for example, has utilized for its ‘.google’ TLD. ‘about.google’ and ‘about.google.com’ both worked, because some people would make the mistake of adding the ‘.com’.

Similarly, regardless of whether a dotBrand application is filed, brands must not lose sight of the broader domain landscape – namely, the launch of new open TLDs, alongside the increasing spread of AI-fueled abuse online. 

Pinky Brand, industry veteran and managing director of Pinky Brand Consulting (FocusNua USA), states:

There is so much online fraud and all kinds of cybersecurity incidents that are wreaking havoc and increasing costs for everyone in the ecosystem. Something has to change, so maybe brands are thinking that one tool that might significantly impact how they can improve authentication of their brand and increase trust with their customers, vendors, employees and other stakeholders is to apply for, operate and promote their own branded TLD. On the other hand, owning your own brand TLD is not going to exempt you from abuse in other TLDs, social media platforms, etc.

Having extensive experience in guiding brands through the dotBrand application process, Wells also highlights this fact and points out that, aside from failing trademark readiness or budgeting, one of the most frequent and damaging errors that brands made in the previous round was to neglect brand monitoring and protection due to ‘.brand’s launching around the same time as new open TLDs. 

A long-term assessment

At its core, a dotBrand is about long-term digital identity. It’s about authority, trust, control and the ability to truly shape a company’s online presence. 

Examples of strategic and successful dotBrand domain name use include Barklay’s ‘home.barclays’, Canon’s ‘global.canon’, Google’s ‘domains.google’, and BNP Paribas’ ‘group.bnpparibas’.

The 2026 round offers a rare opportunity – only the second in Internet history – to secure that asset. But it also demands preparation: internal coordination, clear leadership, expert guidance, trademark readiness, budget clarity, and a realistic understanding of the commitment involved. 

In short, initial assessment and filing the application is just the beginning, the true value will emerge over the years that follow. 

Whether a brand ultimately decides to apply or not, the process of evaluating the opportunity thoughtfully is in and of itself highly valuable. 

Additionally, brands, whether applying or not, must not forget the bigger picture. The next article in this series will go beyond dotBrand applications and look at strategies for approaching the launch of additional open TLDs, domain portfolio considerations, and enforcement options and tools.

Jeanette Eriksson is responsible for Online Brand Protection at FairWinds, the domain name consultancy that elevates online presence by increasing website traffic, growing revenue, and improving online customer experiences.