As reported by Forbes and other outlets, Web.com will be acquiring domain name registrar Network Solutions for $405 million in cash, plus 18 million shares of common stock, valued at around $155 million.

This acquisition should help Web.com, parent company of Register.com, compete with GoDaddy, which was acquired by a group of private equity firms led by KKR & Co. and Silver Lake Partners last year in a deal worth $2.25 billion. Network Solutions is majority-owned by General Atlantic, another private equity firm, and after the acquisition, General Atlantic and other Network Solutions shareholders will own 37 percent of Web.com.

Network Solutions will bring its two million retail customers, hundreds of thousands of wholesale customers and over six million domains to Web.com. Register.com and Network Solutions are two of the oldest and highest priced registrars in existence.

This development, along with Go Daddy's acquisition, could signal a trend of consolidation in the domain name industry in anticipation of the potential explosion of activity in the domain name space as a result of ICANN's June 20 approval of the New gTLD Program.

Yesterday I attended the Internet Governance Forum USA (IGF-USA), hosted at the Georgetown University Law Center here in Washington, DC. Specifically, I went to sit in on an afternoon workshop titled “Changing Landscape of the Domain Name System: New gTLDs and their Implications for Users: Opportunities and Risks.”

The IGF-USA is the U.S. branch of the broader IGF, a multi-stakeholder organization that was formed to support the United Nations Secretary-General in carrying out the mandate from the World Summit on the Information Society that it convene a forum for various parties to discuss policy. The IGF does not set policy, but provides discussion that can serve as fodder for policy makers, many of whom participate in IGF forums.

The IGF provides a summary of the Changing Landscape of the Domain Name System workshop, along with the list of panelists who led the discussion, here. In addition to those listed, Jamie Hedlund, ICANN’s Vice President, Government Affairs, also participated. As I mentioned before, the IGF cannot actually set policy, and in the case, the workshop dealt with a policy that is already in place. So at times, when audience members expressed trepidation or even disagreement with aspects of the new gTLD program, there was a sense that it was falling on deaf ears.

One audience member raised the question of whether the “rush” for new gTLDs could mirror the .COM bubble and its subsequent burst. Hedlund responded that whether new gTLDs survive is not the point, but that the point of the program is to increase competition. I then asked what will happen when a new, open-registry gTLD (like .MUSIC or .ECO) fails, as so many of the panelists had indicated will likely happen – some will inevitably fail. He answered by explaining that each new gTLD registry must demonstrate that it is financially stable enough to continue operations for three years in the event that it fails, during which time ICANN will find another party to take over the gTLD. However, the exchange ended there; Hedlund never broached the issue of what would happen when certain gTLD registries end up being a bad investment an no party wants to take them over. How long can gTLDs like .FOOD or .BOISE last if no one wants to run them?

I don’t doubt that the IGF has positively influenced policy since its establishment in 2006. However, in the case of new gTLDs, yesterday’s workshop seemed to only confirm what many have expected for some time: that ICANN followed its own agenda with the New gTLD Program, diverting only very briefly to listen to outside advice.

Monday was a long awaited day for many in the domain industry. While some of us have spent the past few years working hard to make the planned launch of new gTLDs as orderly and minimally harmful as possible, others pushed hard for less regulation and an earlier launch. At the end of the day, we have achieved about as much balance as  possible from ICANN, an organization that is biased to begin with.

New gTLDs are coming. On January 12, 2012, the application window will open and ICANN will accept applications for new gTLDs for four months.

If the past two days are any indication of what the next six months will be like, I think we are all in for quite a ride. From early in the morning until well into the night these past two days, I have spent hour after hour discussing and responding to brand owners’ inquires about what to do now. I’m sure today will be no different, as the news cycle has likely pushed the topic of new gTLDs up to the higher echelons of most corporations.

While a select few companies have already announced their plans to apply for their own .BRAND gTLD, the realization that new gTLDs are now around the corner has brought the issue to the top of the minds of everyone that has been waiting on the sideline to see what would happen.

Now that there is no more uncertainty as to whether new gTLDs will be officially approved or not, it is time to begin planning. Like it or not, we will see many, many new gTLDs applied for and launched within the next year. Some will succeed and some will fail. Whether a company ultimately decides to apply for their own gTLD, this impending change will alter the way the Internet looks and how users move through it. All brands will have to adapt to the new landscape. Because of the potential ramifications of this change, the C-Suites of all major companies need to be aware of this issue.

The game is set to change and brand owners need to be ready. But that doesn’t mean they should rush into a decision as some companies are suggesting. Rather, right now they need to take the time to fully understand how new gTLDs will impact their digital strategy, as well as all the benefits and risks of both owning and not owning their own gTLD. The wait and see period is over. Now it’s time to formulate a plan.

If you need the facts and would like help navigating through the noise, drop us a line.

Yesterday, ICANN released the latest version of the Applicant Guidebook for new gTLDs, the version it hopes to present to the Board of Directors for final approval on June 20. This version comes only six weeks after the last version, which attracted a total of 60 comment submissions, many of which expressed concern over trademark protection mechanisms.

Similarly, the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) continues to assert that there remain areas where it disagrees with ICANN. Namely, both the GAC and the International Trademark Association (INTA), have argued that ICANN should improve the Trademark Clearinghouse, the Uniform Rapid Suspension system and the Post-Delegation Dispute Resolution Procedure, all of which are designed to provide protections for trademark owners. The GAC and INTA, among others, do not believe these are sufficient. ICANN has not altered these portions of the Guidebook in this latest version.

For the most part, the changes between the last version and this version of the Guidebook have been minor.

For better or worse, there are strong indications that the ICANN Board will in fact approve this version of the Guidebook later this month. That means that over the coming weeks, by the end of July, brand owners should gather facts, seek external advice and prepare to make a decision on whether they will apply for a gTLD. They should consider how gTLDs will benefit them, including how they plan to use it and what advantages they hope to extract from it. But importantly, they should keep in mind that the policy is still not entirely finalized, and so they should not feel pressured to select technical partners like registry and registrar providers. By late August or September, they should begin actively searching for a partner to assist with the application process.