The Applicant Guidebook published by ICANN makes provisions for basically two types of gTLD applications, community-based and standard applications. The apparent appeal of a community-based gTLD is that in the event of multiple applications for the same name string, a community-based applicant may have the option of electing a community priority evaluation. On the outset, the difference seems subtle and could be satisfied by a creative interpretation of “user community”.     

As an example, a brewery might in fact serve a large “community” of beer drinkers. But that alone would fall short of meeting the full intent of the ICANN’s requirement for dot beer (.beer) to qualify for a community-based gTLD designation. According to the Applicant Guidebook, community-based applications are “intended to be a narrow category for applications where there are unambiguous associations among the applicant, the community served and the applied-for gTLD string.”  To be eligible for a community-based application, the applicant must be able to substantiate its status as a representative of a clearly delineated community. Further, supporting documentation in the form of community endorsement must accompany a community-based application.   

A litmus test to consider a community-based designation would be to ask whether the operation of the proposed gTLD is for the benefit of the defined community rather than the applying entity. Only if the answer is definitively “yes” would exploring a community-based application be worthwhile. Community-based applications will likely undergo a very thorough review by the evaluators to ensure each application meets the requirements for the designation. A single for-profit entity would likely find it very difficult to state its case for a community-based gTLD designation. Trade associations, certain consortiums, and social and ethnic organizations that exist to represent the members of the “community” will be the likely candidates for the community-based designation. 

Even if multiple organizations apply for the same name string, the outcome doesn’t necessarily have to be an “all or nothing” proposition decided by the highest bid. Where companies from different industries apply for the same name string, an option to explore could be an arrangement between the parties to partner in the gTLD.  The more applications there are for the New gTLDs, the greater the possibility of potential name string contention.  This has the potential to become a more significant issue in each subsequent application round.  A thorough analysis of the advantages in applying in the first application round should be a key factor to take into account when considering a New gTLD and when to apply.