What the applied-for strings list tells a TLD holder
A holder may find that an organization has applied in the DNS for the string they hold onchain. What that changes, and how to behave.
ICANN’s 2026 round for new generic top-level domains produces a public list of applied-for strings, published on what ICANN calls Reveal Day. For the holder of an onchain TLD, that list raises one practical question: does any string on it match a string in my portfolio? For most holders the answer is no. For some it is yes, and that moment of recognition carries both possibility and risk.
This article is for holders who want to read that list clearly. It explains what a match actually signals, why that signal is useful, and where the line sits between acting on information and misusing it. By the end you will know how to position a TLD whose string has attracted institutional interest, how to approach the subject if approaching it is appropriate at all, and how to recognize the conduct that erodes value rather than builds it.
Application count as reported by the trade press; evaluation fee from ICANN's new gTLD program pages; renewal fee from the Freename registry's terms.
How to compare a portfolio with the list
The list names strings and the organizations that applied for them. It says nothing about onchain holders. A string is the text that would follow the dot: a brand word, a sector term, a geographic label, a community identifier. Matching your portfolio against the list is a straightforward text comparison, but it rewards care.
Start by writing down every TLD you hold, stripped of formatting. Then search the list for exact matches and for close variants: singular and plural forms, common transliterations if your TLD uses non-Latin characters, and strings built on the same stem as yours. ICANN’s evaluation includes a string-similarity review that can group confusingly similar strings together, so inside the DNS a near-match may be treated much like an exact one. Whether that equivalence carries any weight onchain is a separate question, but knowing about it sharpens the picture.
Be honest about false positives. A short dictionary word can be a trademark in one industry, a sector term in another and an ordinary noun everywhere else. If the applicant for a string is active in a field that has nothing to do with the reason you registered your TLD, you are looking at a coincidence of letters, and the match tells you less than it seems to. The same goes for a variant that only resembles your string. Record it as a near-match and do not promote it to a match in your own mind.
Keep a simple record. For each match or near-match, note the applied-for string, the applicant organization where the published material gives it, and whether the applicant appears to be a brand owner applying for its own name or an operator applying for a generic or sector word. That last distinction matters later, because the two kinds of applicant want different things from a string. At this stage you are gathering information, nothing more.
If your portfolio is large, sort it before you search. The strings most likely to appear on a list of DNS applications are brand words and broad sector terms. The TLD Readiness Score on this site scores how ready a TLD is to be sold, which is a useful thing to know about any TLD that turns out to have a match.
What a match signals: demonstrated institutional interest
An organization that files a new gTLD application has committed significant resources. ICANN’s new gTLD program pages put the expected evaluation fee at USD 227,000 per application, and that is before legal counsel, a registry service provider and the long operational commitment that follows a successful delegation. Filing is not casual. It reflects internal approval, a budget and a strategic decision that operating a TLD under a particular string serves the organization over the long term.
A match therefore tells you one thing with reasonable confidence: a named organization values that string enough to pursue it through the DNS at material cost. That is useful market information. It means the string you hold has been assessed by at least one institution and found worth serious investment.
What the applicant values is the string in the DNS. It tells you nothing about the organization’s awareness of your onchain TLD, its willingness to acquire one, or the price at which an acquisition would make sense for either party. Those are separate questions, and treating a DNS application as a statement about your negotiating position is the mistake this article exists to prevent.
A brand string and a sector string are different signals
Where the applicant is a brand owner applying for its own name, the match says the organization cares about controlling that name as a namespace. Such an organization usually has a legal team that also cares where else the name appears, which can make the onchain TLD relevant to it. It can equally make the organization cautious about anyone who holds its name elsewhere. If your TLD is identical to a mark that someone else owns, speak to your own counsel before you do anything with the match, because trademark rules vary by country and the question of who may use a name is not settled by who registered it first.
Where the applicant is an operator applying for a generic or sector word, the match says there is a business case for issuing names under that word. That is closer to what a holder of .yoursector can do onchain: only the holder of a TLD can issue names under it, such as name.yoursector. The applicant’s interest confirms that the word has commercial pull. It does not make the applicant a buyer, because an operator building a registry in the DNS may have no plan that involves a second naming system.
The comparison between a dotBrand and an onchain TLD is worth reviewing here. An organization pursuing a dotBrand through ICANN is building a closed namespace inside the DNS. An onchain TLD runs on different infrastructure, resolves through different software and serves different uses. A holder who understands both is better placed to explain what they hold without overstating it.
What a match does not mean: there is no obligation on anyone
A match creates no legal obligation on the organization and no entitlement for the holder. The organization has applied for a string in the DNS. It has not applied for your onchain TLD, has not expressed interest in acquiring it, and may not know it exists. The application is a public filing about the applicant’s own plans.
On Freename, what you hold is a token in a wallet, recorded onchain by the registry. That record is real and public. It is not something the organization must reckon with before it can operate a gTLD in the DNS. The two systems are independent. A new gTLD can be delegated and operated without any interaction with the onchain namespace. Onchain names resolve outside the DNS, so an ordinary browser does not open them without added support, and that support is partial. If the two names ever meet, what happens depends on the software through which a user reaches either one, not on a rule that flows automatically from one system into the other.
A holder who believes a match creates leverage is reasoning from a false premise. Seeing this clearly matters ethically and commercially. The holder who approaches a counterparty from an imagined position of strength is corrected quickly, and the correction makes any later conversation harder.
| Fact | What it means | What it does not mean |
|---|---|---|
| A match on the list | A named organization values this string and has invested to pursue it in the DNS | That the organization knows your TLD exists or wants it |
| The applicant’s evaluation fee | An expected USD 227,000 committed to a DNS application | A price, or a willingness to pay, for an onchain TLD |
| Your earlier registration date | One weighted criterion in Freename’s patented method for colliding names | Precedence in any legal or commercial dispute |
| No renewal fee on your TLD | Low holding cost and no deadline on your side | Any right to ask the applicant for anything |
First registration and why it matters in context
The date on which a TLD was first registered onchain is a fact in the registry record. Anyone can check it on a block explorer, a public tool for reading the history of a blockchain. That date is more than history. It is one of the criteria weighted in a method described in U.S. patent US 12,401,618 B1, which Freename AG holds. For a holder comparing dates, its filing is recorded on February 23, 2024 and its grant on August 26, 2025. The text is available on Google Patents, and Domain Name Wire reported on the grant.
The patent covers a rules-based way of deciding which name resolves when two names collide. Competing names are scored, and the score decides the outcome. Among the criteria given weight in that scoring is the one a holder can document, “first registration”, which the patent uses to mean the earliest date of creation. The patent itself cites new ICANN TLDs colliding with established web3 namespaces as one of the problems it sets out to address.
Three limits must be stated plainly. First, a patent sets out a method. No court has ruled on anything here, and ICANN is not bound by it. Second, resolution depends on which software a user’s browser, wallet or application relies on, and not all software applies this method. Third, a scoring method is not a finding that an onchain TLD prevails in any particular dispute. Your own counsel decides what any of this means for your position.
What first registration does support is a factual account. A holder who registered .yourbrand onchain before a DNS application for the same string was filed can show that the string was valued in the onchain namespace first. That account is relevant context in a well-prepared conversation. It is not a claim against the applicant, and it should never be presented as one.
It also has a limit that holders tend to overlook. An early date shows when you registered, not why. A string registered because it is a useful sector word reads very differently from a string registered because it is someone else’s brand. The date is the same kind of fact in both cases, but the conversation it supports is not. This is one more reason to take advice before relying on it.
Why pressure destroys value
The holder who responds to a match by contacting the applicant in a hurry, implying that the applicant has a problem to solve, or framing the conversation around the applicant’s exposure is making a strategic error. It may also be a legal one, which is for counsel in the relevant country to assess.
Organizations that apply for a dotBrand are typically advised by experienced IP counsel. An unsolicited message that implies a threat is read for what it is, and the response is rarely to open a negotiation. It is to keep a record of the message and consider whether it shows bad faith. The Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy, the UDRP, applies to domain names in the DNS, and an onchain TLD is not a DNS domain name. That does not make a badly framed approach safe. Trademark law exists independently of the UDRP, and the reputational cost is the same whichever system is involved.
Beyond the immediate reaction, pressure closes the space in which a real transaction could happen. A counterparty who feels coerced does not become a willing buyer. It becomes a hostile one, or it disengages. The TLD that might have attracted a considered offer becomes associated with a difficult holder, and that association follows the asset to every later conversation, including conversations with other parties.
The value of an onchain TLD rests on what it can do, not on what it might cost an organization to ignore it. What works on onchain TLDs, with its limits, is worth understanding before any conversation, because the case for the asset is made of those capabilities and nothing else.
The right conduct: one careful approach, or none at all
When no approach is the right answer
For many matches, the correct action is to do nothing outward at all. That is true when the match is a coincidence of letters, when your TLD is identical to a mark another party owns and your counsel advises against contact, or when you cannot yet say plainly what your TLD does and what it is worth. Doing nothing costs you little. The information stays in your record, your TLD stays in your wallet, and nothing has been said that cannot be unsaid.
The form of a single approach
If you decide that contact is appropriate, the approach has one acceptable form. It presents the onchain TLD as an asset with its own utility, accepts that the organization may have no interest in it, and invites a conversation without condition or deadline. The DNS application is not mentioned as a source of difficulty, no date is attached, and nothing suggests that the TLD is a risk the organization has to deal with. You are giving information about an asset. The organization decides whether it matters.
- Describe the assetState what you hold, when it was registered and what it can do. A brief factual description persuades more than a long one. The organization can verify all of it without you, since the registry record is public and a block explorer displays it.
- Mention the shared string neutrallyYou may say that you hold the onchain TLD for a string the organization uses. Do not present its DNS application as a problem, and do not comment on its plans.
- Invite, never demandOffer more information or a conversation. Make one approach and do not follow it with reminders. Silence is a complete answer.
- Cover the exchangeA conversation about value or a possible transfer belongs under a mutual NDA from its first substantive exchange, which protects both parties and allows a frank discussion.
Many holders are poorly placed to make this approach themselves. The reason is not a lack of skill. A holder writing directly to a brand owner has a visible interest in the outcome from the first word, and the message is read in that light however carefully it is drafted. An intermediary acting under mandate can present the asset in a neutral frame and carry the conversation if one develops.
A holder who prefers that route can read how sell-side mandates work at Hush Partners, where a holder mandates the desk to find a buyer. A holder who first wants to know what a TLD is worth can request a private valuation.
Timing and patience
The ICANN process that follows the publication of applied-for strings is long. Applications pass through evaluation, similarity review, periods for comments and objections and, where several applicants seek the same string, a process to resolve the contention. An application can be changed, withdrawn or rejected along the way. An organization that has applied is committed to the process, but its outcome is not guaranteed.
None of those stages is a deadline for you, and none is an opening either. The applicant’s calendar belongs to the applicant. A holder who plans contact around a stage of someone else’s application has started to think in terms of that party’s exposure, which is the frame the previous sections rule out.
Your own position is patient by construction. A Freename TLD carries no yearly renewal charge, so holding it does not cost more with each season that passes. Nothing in the registry forces you to sell, to answer or to decide. A holder under no time pressure has no reason to create time pressure for anyone else.
Patience is not idleness. The time is well spent on the things that make a TLD worth acquiring whether or not anyone on the list ever calls. Put the TLD to work where that makes sense: issue names under it, document what resolves and where, and keep a clean record of how the wallet that holds it is controlled. Freename runs a royalty program under which a TLD’s holder receives part of each registration fee for names registered under it, advertised at up to half and subject to the registry’s terms and activation conditions. A TLD with names in use and a documented history is a different proposition from a string that has only ever sat in a wallet.
The right moment for a conversation is therefore set by your own readiness, not by an event in the DNS. When you can state what the TLD does, show its record and name a value you can defend, you are ready. Before that, an approach is premature whatever the list says.
When there is no match
A holder whose strings do not appear on the list should not conclude that those TLDs are worth less. The list reflects one round of institutional demand in one naming system. It does not capture every organization that may value a particular string, and many organizations never apply for a gTLD at all. An application is expensive and demanding, so the absence of one says more about an organization’s appetite for running DNS infrastructure than about its interest in a name.
The absence of a match is also not permanent, and it is not the only route to interest. An organization may come to an onchain TLD for reasons that have nothing to do with the DNS: names that resolve in wallets, payments to a name, a website published under the TLD. Sector terms, community identifiers and geographic strings can draw interest from directions no application list would ever show.
There is even a quiet advantage in having no match. Nobody can read your conduct as a reaction to an application, and nothing about your TLD invites the suspicion that it was registered with an applicant in mind. You are free to build on the string on its own merits.
The same principles apply as for a holder with a match: know what you hold, document it, and understand its value. The page for holders sets out how the desk works with people in that position.
Protecting your position without overreaching
A holder’s best protection is a well-documented position: a clear registry record, a factual account of first registration, an accurate view of what the TLD can and cannot do, and a realistic sense of its value. None of these needs the ICANN list to be useful. The list only adds one more piece of context to them.
Value is the element holders most often get wrong after a match. The applicant’s evaluation fee is not a reference price for your TLD. It is what one organization expects to pay ICANN to have an application evaluated, for a different asset in a different system with different obligations. Anchoring on it produces a number that no counterparty recognizes. The way a TLD valuation is built starts from the TLD itself, and a holder who has done that work is less likely to open a conversation at the wrong figure or in the wrong frame.
The list does not change the basic logic of holding. An onchain TLD is a long-duration asset with a low carrying cost. Its value is realized when a counterparty is interested of its own accord, the conversation is structured well and the transfer is handled cleanly. A match is one input among several. It is not a trigger, and it is not a clock.
A concrete next step for a holder with a match
Write the match down, with the applicant and the type of string, and put it with the rest of your record for that TLD. Ask your own counsel whether the string raises a trademark question in the countries that matter to you. Then decide, without hurry, between making no approach, making one yourself in the form described above, or mandating someone to act for you.
If you choose the third route, Hush Partners is a private desk for onchain TLDs that takes mandates from holders who want a buyer found. The desk does not name the seller of a given TLD, a standard mutual NDA covers every exchange, and one named partner follows a file from the first note to closing. Its fee is a fixed amount, not a percentage, and it is charged only to the client who gives the mandate. The desk works by published rules of engagement, and it is reached only through the contact form on this site.
Questions people ask
Does an ICANN application for a string give the applicant any rights over my onchain TLD?
The application itself does not. ICANN’s gTLD program governs the DNS, and onchain namespaces run on separate infrastructure that the program does not administer. Your registry record is public and can be checked by anyone on a block explorer. Trademark rights are a different matter: they exist outside both naming systems and vary by country, so ask your own counsel how they bear on your string.
If I hold a TLD that matches an applied-for string, should I register a trademark?
That is a question for your own counsel, who will look at your country, your actual use of the string and whether someone else already has rights in it. In general terms, a trademark and an onchain TLD are separate things. Holding one does not give you the other, and filing for a mark in order to strengthen a position against an applicant is the kind of move this article advises against.
Can the organization operate its gTLD in the DNS without regard to my onchain TLD?
In most settings, yes. The two systems are independent, and most people reach names through DNS software that knows nothing of onchain TLDs. A collision only arises where software tries to resolve both, which is the situation the Freename patent describes a method for. Do not assume the organization’s DNS plans are affected by the existence of an onchain TLD with the same string.
What happens to my TLD if the DNS application does not succeed?
Nothing changes in your registry record. An onchain TLD exists independently of ICANN outcomes. If the application is withdrawn or rejected, your TLD is still held by whoever holds the token and still does whatever it did before. One possible source of interest may fade, but the uses of the TLD onchain are untouched.
Can I find out whether an organization is already looking for my TLD?
Not from any public source. An organization that wants an onchain TLD may mandate an intermediary to find and approach its holder, and such a search is private by nature. Do not read an application as evidence that one is under way. If a note reaches you, answer it on its merits. If none does, that is not a signal either.
