The 2026 new gTLD application window has closed
On 12 August 2026, ICANN closed the application window for the next round of new generic top-level domains – the most consequential expansion of the domain name system since 2012. The window had opened on 30 April 2026, and ICANN announced on 13 August 2026 that it had received more than 1,600 primary applications plus more than 1,100 secondary applications for replacement strings. The final totals remain subject to confirmation as evaluation fees are processed.
The new gTLD application window that opened 30 April 2026 and closed 12 August 2026 produced more than 1,600 primary applications, according to ICANN's announcement of 13 August 2026. First delegations are not expected before 2028. Between now and then, brand owners face a structured sequence of objection windows, Trademark Clearinghouse recordals, and Sunrise periods – each with its own deadline. Missing any one of them reduces the options available when a new zone goes live.
This page explains what happens next, on whose schedule, and what brand owners and domain holders should do before the first string confirmation dates are published.
What ICANN received and what it means
More than 1,600 primary applications is a significant volume, though the final count depends on whether evaluation fees are paid for each string. ICANN has not yet published a confirmed total as of 24 August 2026 – verify the current position directly with ICANN. Secondary applications for replacement strings add a further layer of contention around the most commercially attractive names.
For brand owners, the volume matters because it determines how many new zones will eventually exist, how many may conflict with existing marks, and how many competitors – or bad actors – may have applied for strings adjacent to protected names. A brand that sat out the 2012 round and found itself managing dozens of cybersquatting disputes across new gTLDs has good reason to monitor this round closely from the outset.
What happens next, and on whose schedule?
The schedule following window closure is set by ICANN, not by applicants or brand owners. Reveal Day and String Confirmation Day – the points at which applied-for strings become public and confirmed – follow ICANN's evaluation process. Specific dates have not been announced as of 24 August 2026; confirm the current schedule directly with ICANN before relying on any estimated timetable.
What is fixed in structure, if not in date, is the Legal Rights Objection window. The LRO is filed with WIPO and runs from String Confirmation Day. It allows a trademark owner to formally object to a proposed new string on the ground that it infringes an existing mark. The LRO window does not open until strings are confirmed, but the preparation – gathering mark evidence, assessing likelihood of confusion, instructing counsel – is work that can begin now.
After string disputes are resolved and delegation proceeds, a Sunrise period of at least 30 days precedes general availability for each new zone. Rights holders recorded in the Trademark Clearinghouse may register a matching domain during Sunrise before the zone opens to the public. A 90-day Claims period follows general availability: a matching registration triggers a notice to the applicant and, if the registration proceeds, a notification to the mark holder.
If you need to assess which strings present a risk to your brand, or whether a Legal Rights Objection is warranted, contact info@cognomenlaw.com for an assessment.
The Trademark Clearinghouse: why recordal cannot wait
The TMCH is the mechanism that connects your registered trademark to Sunrise and Claims-period protections across new gTLD launches. Without a current TMCH recordal, you have no automatic access to Sunrise registration and receive no Claims notifications. The TMCH is operated by an ICANN-contracted provider; recordal fees are priced per mark per year – confirm the current rate with the TMCH operator directly, as this figure changes.
In our practice, we regularly advise brand owners who discover, during a Sunrise period, that their mark is not in the TMCH. By that point the Sunrise window may already be partially elapsed. Getting into the TMCH is not instantaneous – the verification process takes time, and a backlog builds as a round approaches its active phase. The practical answer is to file now, not when the first string confirms.
One additional point: the TMCH's protection covers marks that are in the Clearinghouse at the time the zone opens. A mark registered after a zone's Sunrise has closed has no retroactive access to that zone's Sunrise period.
What protection does URS offer in new gTLD zones – and what does it not?
Once a new gTLD zone is live and registrations are open, the standard dispute tools apply. The Uniform Rapid Suspension procedure – the URS – was designed specifically for new gTLDs. It offers a faster, lower-cost path than a full UDRP complaint, with a legal fee starting from USD 1,200 and a forum fee from USD 375.
The critical distinction – and a point that is widely misunderstood – is that URS does not transfer the domain. It suspends it for the remainder of the registration term. If your goal is to acquire the domain, not merely take it offline, the UDRP is the appropriate route. The UDRP applies to new gTLDs as it does to .com and other accredited zones, and the only remedies it can order are transfer or cancellation – no monetary award.
In a recent matter (a new-gTLD cybersquatting filing, spring 2025), we chose the UDRP rather than the URS for a brand owner whose primary objective was ownership, not mere suspension. The additional timeline was justified by the remedy actually needed. That is a judgment call that depends on the facts of each domain dispute – the registrant's conduct, the value of the name, and what the brand owner actually wants to achieve.
To weigh URS suspension against a full UDRP complaint for a new gTLD domain, email info@cognomenlaw.com.
Who is affected by the 2026 round?
Any brand with a registered trademark faces potential exposure as new zones come online. The risk is not hypothetical: the 2012 round generated a sustained wave of cybersquatting complaints in new gTLDs, many of which are still being decided under the UDRP today. A domain dispute in a new zone follows the same three-element test as any other UDRP – confusing similarity, no legitimate interest, registration and use in bad faith – but the zone name itself may be the source of the confusion.
Domain investors are also watching closely. Strings that survive objection and reach delegation may command premium secondary-market prices, and a consolidation of abusive registrations across multiple new zones by a single registrant is possible under the UDRP's multi-domain complaint mechanism, provided the registrant is the same holder. We advise both brand owners and legitimate domain investors – the right strategy differs by client position.
About COGNOMEN
COGNOMEN is an independent boutique focused exclusively on domain-name disputes. We recover, defend, and transact internet domains across generic and country-code zones, before WIPO, the Forum, CAC, ADNDRC, and national procedures, and in court where arbitration cannot reach. We act for brand owners, domain investors, and registrants – including respondent-side defense and reverse domain name hijacking. COGNOMEN focuses only on domain-name disputes – recovery, defense, and transactions. To discuss a domain matter arising from the 2026 gTLD round, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.
Related at COGNOMEN
Frequently asked questions
What changed and when?
ICANN's application window for the next new gTLD round opened on 30 April 2026 and closed on 12 August 2026. On 13 August 2026, ICANN announced it had received more than 1,600 primary applications plus more than 1,100 secondary applications for replacement strings. The final confirmed total depends on payment of evaluation fees. First delegations are not expected before 2028; intermediate milestones – Reveal Day, String Confirmation Day, Legal Rights Objection windows – follow on a schedule set by ICANN.
Who does this affect?
Brand owners with registered trademarks are directly affected: new zones create fresh opportunities for cybersquatting and typosquatting, and Sunrise access requires a current Trademark Clearinghouse recordal. Domain investors are watching for valuable strings that survive objection. Existing registrants in adjacent zones may see competitive dynamics shift if a new string closely resembles a zone they operate in. Anyone with a stake in an affected name should assess their position before String Confirmation Day opens objection windows.
What should I do now?
Three steps are worth taking immediately. First, check or establish your Trademark Clearinghouse recordal so your mark is on record before Sunrise periods begin. Second, identify which applied-for strings – once published on Reveal Day – are confusingly similar to your mark, to assess whether a Legal Rights Objection to WIPO is warranted. Third, confirm the current ICANN schedule directly, as intermediate dates are set by ICANN and move. For a case-specific assessment, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.
Author: Cordelia Roe — UDRP complainant practice & gTLD recovery; domain transactions and brand protection. Meet the team.
Speak with Cognomen Law
For a scoped view of your domain matter, contact info@cognomenlaw.com. Discuss your matter
This publication is general information and does not constitute legal advice. For advice on your situation, contact info@cognomenlaw.com.