The boundaries between the traditional Domain Name System (DNS) and alternative naming systems may become increasingly blurred. ICANN is currently examining the conditions under which the same gTLD could be integrated into both the DNS and an alternative naming system, including those based on blockchain technologies.
This development is no longer merely theoretical. In 2025, we discussed the emergence of cryptoTLDs and “twinTLDs”, as well as the risks of collisions and the difficulties this convergence could create for trademark owners. Projects such as .BLOCKCHAIN and, more recently, .ROBOT illustrate attempts to make the same extension operate across both the DNS and Web3 environments.
ICANN is now beginning to consider the framework governing this convergence.
One name across multiple systems
In August 2026, an ICANN Technical Study Group (TSG) published its Initial Report on gTLD Integrations with Alternative Naming Systems. The model under consideration is based in particular on a string + controller principle: the same string should remain under the control of the same entity across the integrated systems. The status of names should also be synchronised. In its comments published in September 2026, ICANN’s Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC) supports this approach. For example, where a name is suspended as a result of abuse or a court order, the suspension should in principle take effect across all integrated systems.
This convergence nevertheless raises an essential question for trademark owners: how can the protection mechanisms that exist within the DNS be extended to alternative naming systems?
What future for the UDRP?
The SSAC notes, in particular, that applying the UDRP or Uniform Rapid Suspension System (URS) is not straightforward where a registrant uses only an alternative name and conventional registration data are unavailable. It therefore proposes that an operator wishing to use an alternative naming system as its primary system should be required to demonstrate the existence of mechanisms functionally equivalent to the UDRP and URS.
The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center highlights another risk: cybersquatting already exists at the second level within alternative naming systems. Automatically mapping names between these systems and the DNS could therefore allow a cybersquatter to replicate within the DNS an infringement that already exists in an alternative naming system. WIPO considers that trademark owners should be able to challenge such situations and, where an infringement is established, prevent the corresponding name from being activated within the relevant gTLD.
Protecting trademarks beyond the DNS
The issue therefore goes beyond technical “collisions” between naming spaces. It directly concerns trademark protection.
Integrating the DNS with alternative naming systems means that protection mechanisms may also need to cross that boundary. Some initiatives have already anticipated this development: Unstoppable Domains joining GlobalBlock extended a preventive brand protection mechanism to certain blockchain names.
For trademark owners, the challenge will therefore be twofold: preserving the effectiveness of existing mechanisms such as the UDRP, while also monitoring naming spaces beyond the traditional DNS.
As the boundaries between these systems become increasingly blurred, online brand protection will likely need to cross them as well.
IP Twins and brand protection in Web3
IP Twins assists trademark owners in protecting their digital assets across both the traditional DNS and emerging naming spaces. Its Blockchain / Web3 solutions include monitoring blockchain names that may infringe intellectual property rights and taking action against cryptosquatting.