Is it tricky? If you have a trademark, you can have a gTLD - simple as that.

Because the problem is how can apple have a trademark on the word “apple”?

For me, the same rules should be enforced for trademarks because an apple orchard might also like to have a trademark but that’s difficult because “apple” is already a trademark.

Edit: as pointed out in the comments, this position doesn't take into account that trademarks are very much national and cultural.

Perhaps one day gTLDs will become free (once the gold rush is over) just as SSL/TLS certificates did with the arrival of Lets Encrypt.

▲

swiftcoder 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

Trademarks are not globally unique (even within a single country!).

A good example of this is the long running legal dispute between Apple Computer and Apple Music, who each held a trademark on "Apple" in their respective domains, and which prevented the Beatles from playing on iTunes for a decade...

▲

dcvfsss 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You seem to be missing that trademarks are generally context specific

E.g. Apple has a trademark in the context of technology but not in the context of farming

Whereas gTLDs are flat namespace

▲

Towaway69 5 days ago | parent [-]

Ok, good point. I assumed global trademarks but yes trademarks are nation based.

Should then only multi-national organisations be allowed to obtain gTLDs?

Obviously the ICANN price tag of USD227k is also a good entry barrier.

	▲	echoangle 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		The problem isn’t that trademarks are country-based but that trademarks are business area based. You can have multiple trademarks for the same word for different companies if the companies do different things. Apple doesn’t have the right to prevent you from using the word „apple“ to sell lawn mowers.

▲

toolslive 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

there was a fight between Apple, the computer company and Apple, the record company (initially owned by The Beatles). They initially resolved it by The Beatles allowing the other to one to keep its name on the condition they would refrain from entering the music business.

We all know how that turned out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Records

▲

portaouflop 5 days ago | parent [-]

How did it turn out? Seems like both still have their trademark and everyone lived happily ever after

	▲	LocalH 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Apple owns all of the related trademarks, and licenses the relevant ones to Apple Records.
	▲	toolslive 5 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Corps_v_Apple_Computer
	▲	thayne 4 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Apple Computers obviously broke their promise to stay out of the music business (most notably with iTunes and related products).
	▲	gizajob 4 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The Beatles got richer, and then got a whole lot richer.