ICANN’s 2025 New gTLD Round Opportunities and Conflicts with Web3 Registries

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is poised to launch its long-anticipated second round of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) in 2025, opening the gates once again for organizations, governments, and private entities to apply for and operate new domain extensions beyond the well-known .com, .org, and .net. The last major round, conducted in 2012, saw the introduction of nearly 1,200 new gTLDs including .tech, .xyz, and .app. With the 2025 round, ICANN aims to inject further diversity and innovation into the DNS ecosystem, but the timing of this initiative introduces a complex dynamic with the rise of blockchain-based naming systems. As Web3 registries like Ethereum Name Service (ENS), Unstoppable Domains, and Space ID gain traction, the new gTLD process presents both significant opportunities and escalating conflicts that highlight the growing divide—and potential convergence—between legacy internet governance and decentralized naming infrastructure.

For traditional internet stakeholders, the 2025 round represents a chance to secure namespace leadership within verticals that have since gained cultural or economic prominence. It is expected that new applicants will target gTLDs aligned with blockchain terminology, such as .nft, .defi, .wallet, .dao, and .crypto—names that already exist in popular Web3 contexts. The opportunity for conflict becomes immediately apparent. These terms have been widely adopted as suffixes in decentralized naming systems. Domains like vitalik.eth, governance.dao, or payments.crypto are already in circulation and resolving via blockchain-based resolvers. If ICANN permits centralized gTLDs using these same strings, it could create a confusing dual-resolution landscape where the same name operates differently depending on whether it’s accessed through a traditional browser or a Web3-native wallet.

This namespace collision is not theoretical. Unstoppable Domains previously filed for trademarks related to .crypto and has actively pursued enforcement against others seeking to use identical suffixes in decentralized contexts. With ICANN’s 2025 gTLD window, the tables could turn: a centralized registry may apply for and receive the rights to operate .crypto under ICANN’s oversight, placing it in direct conflict with an already widely used blockchain-based namespace. This raises thorny questions about trademark rights, user confusion, and the legitimacy of competing systems. ICANN has historically ignored blockchain naming services in its deliberations, but as Web3 domains reach tens of millions of users and are integrated into wallets, social platforms, and smart contract layers, continued neglect may no longer be tenable.

Web3 registries themselves face a strategic crossroads. Some are exploring participation in ICANN’s process as a defensive or expansionist move. For instance, a decentralized naming service could apply for the same gTLD it already administers in a blockchain context, effectively bridging the DNS and blockchain resolution systems. This hybrid model would allow a name like username.crypto to resolve both through standard DNS infrastructure and through blockchain-based tools like MetaMask, Brave, or decentralized browsers. However, the costs and constraints of the ICANN process present a serious hurdle. Application fees alone are projected to be upwards of $250,000, not including legal, technical, and ongoing compliance costs. Additionally, ICANN gTLDs are subject to centralized control, renewal terms, and content policies—conditions fundamentally at odds with the permissionless ethos of many Web3 projects.

Even more critically, ICANN’s process introduces a governance bottleneck. Applicants must demonstrate operational stability, financial resources, and community support. These requirements often favor established corporations or well-funded entities, creating structural barriers for DAO-based or grassroots Web3 projects. A DAO attempting to apply for .eth or .dao through ICANN would have to articulate legal standing, jurisdiction, and a contractually bound management entity—anathema to the design of most decentralized communities. As a result, centralized corporations might outcompete DAOs in securing rights to gTLDs that originated within Web3 culture, thereby introducing an uncomfortable centralization of namespace authority around assets that had previously been community-driven and open-source.

On the other hand, the 2025 ICANN round presents opportunities for interoperability and user onboarding if approached with nuance. A naming system like ENS could collaborate with a compliant registrar to launch a DNS-based .eth gTLD, tying it via DNSSEC and smart contract gateways to its existing on-chain namespace. This would allow traditional users—those browsing in Chrome or Safari—to access ENS content through familiar URLs, while preserving decentralized resolution on the blockchain. Such convergence would reduce friction for mass adoption, enhance discoverability, and allow wallet-native identities to interoperate with email systems, content distribution networks, and even enterprise IT infrastructure. The challenge lies in negotiating the technical and ideological gaps between DNS-rooted naming and blockchain-rooted naming, especially in terms of governance and update mechanisms.

There is also an increasingly important geopolitical layer. Governments and multinational organizations are expected to participate in the 2025 round, including some with interests in asserting control over naming conventions associated with national identity, digital sovereignty, or critical infrastructure. This further complicates the position of Web3 registries that operate outside national legal frameworks and may find themselves in adversarial positions with state actors who view decentralized naming as a regulatory threat. A scenario where a government-affiliated entity acquires .wallet through ICANN while simultaneously banning or undermining blockchain-based equivalents would not only confuse users but also challenge the neutrality of namespace development.

Meanwhile, end users stand at the center of this collision. Without careful UX design, interoperability planning, and public education, there is significant risk of confusion. Two domains with the same name—say, treasury.dao on a DNS-based system and treasury.dao on a blockchain resolver—could point to entirely different owners, content, and credentials. This undermines trust and introduces vectors for phishing, impersonation, and fraud. To mitigate this, browser vendors, wallet developers, and naming standards groups may need to adopt unified resolution frameworks, UI indicators, or opt-in registries that inform users about which namespace is being queried.

Ultimately, ICANN’s 2025 new gTLD round represents both a wake-up call and an inflection point for the Web3 naming community. The legitimacy, market share, and utility of blockchain-native domains are no longer fringe concerns—they are real, and increasingly, they intersect with the legacy internet in ways that demand coordination or risk escalation. The opportunity lies in co-creating resolution protocols, namespace registries, and user interfaces that respect both systems’ design goals. The conflict lies in the structural and ideological mismatches between centralized governance and decentralized identity. How this tension resolves over the coming years will shape the future of digital identity, user experience, and internet architecture itself.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is poised to launch its long-anticipated second round of new generic top-level domains (gTLDs) in 2025, opening the gates once again for organizations, governments, and private entities to apply for and operate new domain extensions beyond the well-known .com, .org, and .net. The last major round,…