The statistics of the Arbitration and Mediation Center of the World Intellectual Property Organization (CAM-WIPO) for the year 2019 revealed that the share of new gTLDs in domain name cases was around 10% (ompi.int, April 8, 2020). These cases mainly concerned the following gTLDs: .online (64), .xyz (49), .win (48), .club (34), .top (31), .app (31), .site (31), .website (.24), .store (.22). Given the multiplicity of new gTLDs, this percentage seems relatively low.
The main explanation seems to be sought in the cost of registering/renewing a domain name. Indeed, with regard to the gTLDs mentioned, this cost hardly exceeds a few tens of dollars (prices charged by the main registrars, excluding promotions). On the other hand, the registration of a domain name including the .global gTLD requires an investment of more than 100 euros (excluding promotions), which explains why there were only three cases. As for the acquisition of a .car , it requires several thousand dollars, and, to our knowledge, there is, to date, no case of cybersquatting for this top-level domain.
In 2019, no decision was rendered under the aegis of CAM-COMPI concerning the .CEO gTLD. The registration/renewal of a .CEO domain costs around 150 dollars. However, some cybersquatters could consider such an amount as a small investment or, when the opportunity arises, they could take advantage of favorable financial situations (such as promotions). For instance, AbbVie, Inc. recently had to initiate a UDRP procedure to get the transfer of abbvie.ceo (NAF, FA2007001906861, AbbVie, Inc. v. Jack Gao , August 25, 2020). The cost of a .CEO is similar to that of a .global (over 100 euros, excluding promotion).
New gTLDs offer new cybersquatting (and not just typosquatting) opportunities for cybersquatters and other fraudsters. The number of cases of cybersquatting (domain name identical to the brand) appears to be increasing. Here are a few examples:
This trend may convince trademark owners to consider a rigorous precautionary registration strategy.