Company applies for .sex, .porn and .adult domain names
Web addresses are about to get a lot more creative, with the upcoming expansion of generic top-level domains (gTLDs), the end portions of website names.
June 11, 2012 at 08:00 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Web addresses are about to get a lot more creative, with the upcoming expansion of generic top-level domains (gTLDs), the end portions of website names. Currently, there are only a few gTLDs available, including the old standards .com, .org and .net. In December 2011, the new gTLD .xxx was introduced, with the goal of sequestering online adult content. Now, ICM Registry, the same company that owns .xxx wants to get three more adult domain names under its belt: .sex, .porn and .adult, CNNMoney reports.
All of the new gTLDs that companies are applying for will be revealed on June 13, but we already know a few. For example, Google wants to own .lol. Other gTLDs that are in demand include .inc, .blog, .video and .city, as well as a few oddballs like .sucks, .vodka and .horse. Inevitably, there will be disputes between companies who want the same gTLDs, and ICM is ready to fight for the ones it wants.
“We don't want someone to take over what we've done as the incumbent [with .xxx],” ICM CEO Stuart Lawley told CNN. “We're trying to produce clearly identified content that doesn't confuse consumers.”
ICM is trying to create an industry standard for adult content online by acquiring all these relevant domain names. With .xxx, it established a best practices model in which it scanned its 200,000 registered sites for malware daily, adopted a zero-tolerance policy for child pornography and other illegal content and developed a process by which companies could dispute trademarks.
Not everyone is thinking ahead that much. A recent survey conducted by Melbourne IT Digital Brand Services revealed that while most trademark attorneys are aware of the upcoming gTLD expansion, many of them are woefully unprepared. Of those surveyed, 54 percent felt that the new domain names pose a moderate or high risk to their clients, but only 36 percent have read the gTLD Application Guidebook.
Once the gTLD applications are officially revealed, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will have a public comment period of 60 days, during which companies can formally object if they take issue with any of the applications. While 47 percent of attorneys surveyed said they felt somewhat or very prepared to respond during this period, only 12 percent have ever previously participated in an ICANN public comment process.
Read more InsideCounsel coverage of gTLDs:
Is your company considering a domain name change?
IP: Trademark liability and the .xxx domain
IP: A defensive strategy for new gTLDs
Technology: 8 strategies to protect trademarks against new domain names
Web addresses are about to get a lot more creative, with the upcoming expansion of generic top-level domains (gTLDs), the end portions of website names. Currently, there are only a few gTLDs available, including the old standards .com, .org and .net. In December 2011, the new gTLD .xxx was introduced, with the goal of sequestering online adult content. Now, ICM Registry, the same company that owns .xxx wants to get three more adult domain names under its belt: .sex, .porn and .adult, CNNMoney reports.
All of the new gTLDs that companies are applying for will be revealed on June 13, but we already know a few. For example,
“We don't want someone to take over what we've done as the incumbent [with .xxx],” ICM CEO Stuart Lawley told CNN. “We're trying to produce clearly identified content that doesn't confuse consumers.”
ICM is trying to create an industry standard for adult content online by acquiring all these relevant domain names. With .xxx, it established a best practices model in which it scanned its 200,000 registered sites for malware daily, adopted a zero-tolerance policy for child pornography and other illegal content and developed a process by which companies could dispute trademarks.
Not everyone is thinking ahead that much. A recent survey conducted by Melbourne IT Digital Brand Services revealed that while most trademark attorneys are aware of the upcoming gTLD expansion, many of them are woefully unprepared. Of those surveyed, 54 percent felt that the new domain names pose a moderate or high risk to their clients, but only 36 percent have read the gTLD Application Guidebook.
Once the gTLD applications are officially revealed, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will have a public comment period of 60 days, during which companies can formally object if they take issue with any of the applications. While 47 percent of attorneys surveyed said they felt somewhat or very prepared to respond during this period, only 12 percent have ever previously participated in an ICANN public comment process.
Read more InsideCounsel coverage of gTLDs:
Is your company considering a domain name change?
IP: Trademark liability and the .xxx domain
IP: A defensive strategy for new gTLDs
Technology: 8 strategies to protect trademarks against new domain names
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
SEC Puts Beat Down on Ex-Wrestling CEO Vince McMahon for Not Reporting Settlements
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
