In April 2026, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will open applications for a new round of top‑level domains (TLD). This round offers organisations a rare chance to operate their own TLD, including a .brand extension. For brand owners, this is a strategic opportunity to gain trust, security, and long‑term control over how customers find and interact with you online. The organisations that benefit most will be those that move early, prepare thoroughly, and understand the process.

What are TLDs?

A TLD is the last element of a domain name and functions as a foundational layer of the Domain Name System (DNS). Popular examples of legacy TLDs include .com, .org, .au or .shop. Beneath each TLD sits a second‑level domain (SLD), which forms the familiar domain structure used by businesses and consumers. For example, in netflix.com, ‘netflix’ is the SLD and ‘.com’ is the TLD.

Today, TLDs serve as distinctive markers of identity and function. They are strategic assets capable of shaping user trust, reinforcing brand identity, and enabling more coherent naming. For example, a TLD such as .paris signals geographical relevance, whilst .tech immediately situates a business within the technology industry. Brand‑exclusive TLDs (such as .nike or .google) add a further level of differentiation, enabling companies like Microsoft and BMW to operate secure, tightly controlled namespaces. Brand-exclusive TLDs are particularly effective for reducing ambiguity amongst users and enhancing trust in digital environments.

What’s on offer?

The 2026 round will include two main categories of applications:

• .brand TLDs, which are exclusively available to trade mark owners (who satisfy the eligibility conditions in specification 13 of the Registry Agreement); and
• generic or industry‑based TLDs, which may be operated as open or restricted registries.

A .brand TLD confers full control over the namespace to the brand owner, allowing them to create SLD registrations solely for their own benefit and purposes. In contrast, generic TLDs offer opportunities for registry operators (including existing registrars) to build a profitable business model around licensing fees for related SLDs.

Strategic value of .brand TLDs

A key distinction between generic and .brand TLDs relates to security exposure. Independent analyses of DNS abuse consistently show that open, low‑cost generic TLDs account for disproportionately high levels of phishing, malware and spam when compared with legacy TLDs and .brand TLDs. Moreover, brands who utilise generic TLDs often engage in the costly process of acquiring SLDs in an effort to proactively defend against fraud. In contrast, abuse is virtually non‑existent in .brand TLDs because only the brand operator (and authorised affiliates) can register related SLDs.

Operationally, .brand TLDs also enable clean, consistent naming across products, regions, and functions. They also allow organisations to segregate high‑risk content, enforce security standards, and reduce reliance on crowded legacy domains.

It is important to note that a .brand TLD is not owned as property. ICANN grants a contractual right to operate the TLD under a Registry Agreement, typically for 10 years (with presumptive renewal). Registrars also cannot sell .brand domain licenses to the public; at most, they may act as technical provisioning channels under the brand owner’s control.

Lessons from the last round

The last expansion of the DNS in 2012 resulted in more than 1,200 new TLDs being delegated. Some of these became runaway successes:

• the .app TLD quickly became a favourite among software developers because it offered a clean, intuitive namespace for application‑related websites (for example, ‘cash.app’);
• the .xyz extension gained global recognition after being adopted by major tech companies and startups (for example, Alphabet, Google’s parent company, which famously uses ‘abc.xyz’);
• city‑based TLDs like .london and .nyc gave local businesses and cultural institutions new ways to signal their geographic identity (for example, ‘visitlondon.london’); and
• .brand TLDs allowed companies to build secure, trusted digital environments that reduce phishing risks and strengthen customer confidence (for example, ‘.barclays’).

The 2012 round offers two practical takeaways. First, early adopters gained a competitive advantage by securing memorable, meaningful namespaces before their competitors. Second, successful applicants aligned their TLD strategy with long-term business goals relating to search engine optimisation, enhanced brand protection, and community engagement. The 2026 round presents similar opportunities — but with a more rigorous ecosystem and clearer guidance for applicants.

Registry service providers

A key change since 2012 is ICANN’s Registry Service Provider (RSP) Evaluation Program. RSPs operate the technical backend of a TLD, including DNS resolution, security extensions, registration systems, data escrow, and compliance tooling.

In 2026, RSPs are pre‑evaluated by ICANN. This means that applicants can rely on an approved provider rather than having to prove technical capability from scratch. This significantly reduces risk but also makes RSP selection one of the most important early decisions.

ICANN has now published an initial list of approved RSPs, with further providers assessed during the application window. Capacity will be limited, and organisations that delay may find their preferred provider unavailable.

How applications are evaluated

Each 2026 application will be subjected to two core assessments:

• String evaluation, which checks whether the applied‑for TLD is confusingly similar to existing TLDs or other applications. This includes visual similarity, plural/singular variants, geographic name rules, and safeguards for high‑risk strings. ICANN estimates this stage alone can take around six months.
• Application evaluation, covering the applicant’s financial stability, operational readiness, technical capability (usually via an RSP), and policy compliance. Applications are also exposed to public comment and formal objections from rights‑holders, communities, or governments.

The 2026 rules also introduce clearer appeals mechanisms and more predictable timelines — but the process remains extensive and detailed.

Objections, contention, and auctions

Applicants must be prepared for objections, which are heard by specialist dispute providers. Potential objections to an application include:

• legal rights objections (based on existing trade mark rights);
• string confusion objections (based on confusing similarity to an existing or other applied-for TLD);
• community objections (based on substantial opposition from a significant portion of the community represented by the TLD); and
• limited public interest objections (based on international legal norms of morality and public order).

Where multiple applicants seek the same or similar strings, a contention set arises. Auctions of last resort are the final resolution mechanism for unresolved contention sets, with auction proceeds reserved for public benefit uses.

The new rules allow applicants to nominate a replacement string shortly after applications are revealed — a valuable risk‑mitigation tool for those facing likely contention.

Rights protection mechanisms

The Trademark Clearinghouse (TMCH) remains the cornerstone of trade mark protection during TLD launches. The TMCH is a centralised database of verified trade marks, designed to protect trade mark owners from infringement when new TLDs are launched by ICANN.

Trade mark holders that verify their marks with the TMCH gain priority access to register matching domains during the ‘sunrise period’. The sunrise period is a mandatory pre‑launch phase where trade mark owners can register matching domains before the public and must last at least 30 days.

Following sunrise, the trade mark claims period operates for at least 90 days. During this phase, attempted registration of a domain that exactly matches a TMCH‑verified mark triggers an immediate warning to the applicant. If the applicant proceeds, the trade mark owner is notified. This mechanism does not block registrations but deters opportunistic or bad faith registrations by ensuring early transparency.

These obligations do not generally apply to .brand TLDs, which operate as closed namespaces. Nonetheless, brand owners should ensure their marks are TMCH‑verified before submission to streamline evaluation of brand eligibility and to enhance protection across all open TLDs launched by other operators.

Fees and budgeting considerations

The evaluation fee for 2026 is USD $227,000 per application, with additional fees for certain application types (including .brand eligibility assessments).

Successful applicants must also plan for the full lifecycle of operating a TLD. Organisations should budget for:

• annual ICANN registry fees;
• RSP service fees;
• dispute and objection costs;
• ongoing compliance, security, and audit obligations; and
• potential auction exposure (if a contention set arises).

2026 round timeline

The 2026 Applicant Guidebook and initial approved RSP list is now published. Applications will open in April 2026 and remain open for approximately 12–15 weeks. Evaluation, objections, and contention resolution will run through 2027, with delegation expected in 2027–2028.

Next steps

The 2026 TLD round offers technical and strategical opportunities — and the window to act is already open. The application process is a detailed demonstration of capability, compliance, and stewardship of a significant piece of internet infrastructure.

Organisations considering applying should:

• confirm brand and trade mark readiness;
• assess security and digital architecture goals;
• identify and engage an RSP; and
• prepare a compliant, defensible application.

HWLE Lawyers’ intellectual property team has extensive experience in advising businesses regarding domain names. If you are interested in applying in ICANN’s 2026 TLD round, please contact us for further information on how we can assist you.

This article was written by Luke Dale, Partner, and Jasper Dowdell, Law Clerk.