Timeline: how your gTLD application will progress

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Timeline: how your gTLD application will progress

After Icann finally opened the application stage for new gTLDs today, Managing IP explains the lifecycle of a gTLD application and the hurdles it may have to jump

March

Applicants must register a slot in Icann’s TLD Application System before March 29 2012.

April

Applicants have until April 12 to submit their applications.

Icann will check that all applications are complete before publishing the list of strings by April 27.

May

Both a public comment period and Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) early warning period open for 60 days.

A seven-month objection period opens. Objections can be filed on four grounds: legal rights; community; string confusion; limited public interest.

The GAC can also ask Icann to block a gTLD if members feel it could be sensitive in their countries or violate their laws.

June

An initial evaluation process opens where a team of evaluators assesses each gTLD and carries out background screening checks on applicants. This process is expected to last five months but if applications exceed 500 then Icann will place applications into batches. Processing applications that are not in the first batch will therefore take longer than five months.

November

Applications that pass initial evaluation will be ready for pre-delegation testing; applications that fail this initial stage can enter extended evaluation, where panels may reject some applications.

January/February 2013

If applications pass initial evaluation, are in the first batch, do not receive any formal objections and pass pre-delegation testing, then they will be ready to launch and their registries will open.

There are many permutations in this process, especially if there are auctions, dispute resolution procedures and discussions with the GAC. Icann says complex applications may not receive the go-ahead until 2014.

But the most straightforward applications should be in the root by January or February 2013 – a year and a half after the Icann board voted in favour of the gTLD programme.

Later in 2013

After all the applications have been processed, there will be three reviews of the system. Once these are completed, Icann will launch a second round of applications.

See also: Icann offers olive branch to needy applicants and Politicians win power to block gTLDs.

How many gTLD applications do you predict? Vote in our poll on our homepage.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

This year’s most-read stories covered uncertainty at the USPTO, a potential boycott of a major international IP conference, rankings releases, and a contempt of court proceeding
The parties have agreed on a court-guided settlement covering Pantech’s entire SEP portfolio, marking a global first
The introduction of Canada’s patent term adjustment has left practitioners sceptical about its value, with high fees and limited eligibility meaning SMEs could lose out
With the US privacy landscape more fragmented and active than ever and federal legislation stalled, lawyers at Sheppard Mullin explain how states are taking bold steps to define their own regimes
Viji Krishnan of Corsearch unpicks the results of a survey that reveals almost 80% of trademark practitioners believe in a hybrid AI model for trademark clearance and searches
News of Via Licensing Alliance selling its HEVC/VCC pools and a $1.5 million win for Davis Polk were also among the top talking points
The winner of a high-profile bidding war for Warner Bros Discovery may gain a strategic advantage far greater than mere subscriber growth - IP licensing leverage
A vote to be held in 2026 could create Hogan Lovells Cadwalader, a $3.6bn giant with 3,100 lawyers across the Americas, EMEA and Asia Pacific
Varuni Paranavitane of Finnegan and IP counsel Lisa Ribes compare and contrast two recent AI copyright decisions from Germany and the UK
Exclusive in-house data uncovered by Managing IP reveals French firms underperform on providing value equivalent to billing costs and technology use
Gift this article