Web3: New Opportunities and Growing Threats for Brands

Web3 offers brands a double-edged frontier. On the opportunity side, NFTs let houses like Nike and Gucci engage consumers through virtual experiences and authenticated digital goods. On the threat side, anyone can mint an NFT reproducing a trademark — the MetaBirkins litigation (Hermès v. Rothschild) being the emblematic case — and blockchain domains such as .eth or .sol live in a decentralised, minimally regulated space with no equivalent of the UDRP. Litigation remains costly and out of reach for most brands, while decentralisation defeats traditional enforcement and calls for international cooperation. The article closes with a proactive playbook: register trademarks in classes 9 and 42, monitor NFT marketplaces actively, pursue rapid takedowns, and secure blockchain domains before others do — because in Web3, prevention is worth far more than cure.

.ROBOT: A CryptoTLD Aiming for Its DNS Twin

Unstoppable Domains announced on 3 November 2025 its intention to apply for the .ROBOT top-level domain in ICANN's 2026 round, in partnership with the 0G Foundation. The ambition: a namespace dedicated to robotics and artificial intelligence operating simultaneously in the traditional DNS and on the 0G blockchain, where a Web3 pre-sale is already live with minting expected in early 2026. The article uses this case to explain the emerging 'twinTLD' model — a blockchain extension seeking its exact double in the DNS to preserve on-chain functionality while gaining Web2 legitimacy. It also anticipates the procedural path ahead: possible competing applications, ICANN evaluations and objections, and a potential last-resort auction. For brand owners, the article recommends defensive registrations, multi-domain blocking mechanisms and closer monitoring of on-chain activity, as Web2 and Web3 identities increasingly need to be managed as one continuum.

4 November 2025
Initially published on iptwins.com

2026 in Sight: CryptoTLDs, twinTLDs, and Domain Name Portfolio Strategy

As the 2026 ICANN round approaches, this article maps the accelerating convergence — and friction — between the centralised DNS and decentralised blockchain naming systems. The DNS guarantees uniqueness under a single ICANN-coordinated hierarchy; cryptoTLDs multiply namespaces without central coordination, creating collision risks where the same suffix resolves differently depending on the system — a risk crystallised by the .wallet conflict between Unstoppable Domains and Handshake's Gateway Registry, litigated before a US federal court in 2022. Interoperability is progressing through ENS-DNS bridges and Web3 gateways, but fragmentation persists. Meanwhile the extension race accelerates: Handshake and Unstoppable mint hundreds of cryptoTLDs, 'twinTLDs' emerge as coordinated DNS-blockchain pairs, and Unstoppable prepares ICANN applications for around eleven extensions (.agi, .anime, .blockchain and more). The article concludes with portfolio guidance for brand owners: prioritise interoperable ecosystems, prepare for hybrid Web2-Web3 pairs, and leverage blocking mechanisms such as GlobalBlock.

29 September 2025
Initially published on iptwins.com

Lacoste v Shein: When a Platform Can No Longer Hide Behind Hosting Status

A platform is not one legal object. In Lacoste v Roadget Business Pte. Ltd. and Infinite Styles Services Co. Ltd. (Paris, Pôle 5 ch. 1, 8 July 2026, RG 25/12454), the Court of Appeal refused to let the operators of shein.com shelter behind the hosting exemption of Article 6 of the Digital Services Act: goods “sold by Shein”, Shein labels and packaging, and the Commission’s designation of the service as a very large online platform revealed a hybrid activity, and the characterisation attached not to the platform as a whole but to the role actually played in the disputed transactions. The judgment reaches beyond the twenty offending products. “Lacoste”, typed into the internal search engine, infringes the word marks; “crocodile”, a free word, grounds unfair competition and parasitism. Interim damages rise from €30,000 to €300,000 — the defendants’ own failure to disclose their turnover counting against them — and the measures run across the European Union.

28 August 2026
Initially published on iptwins.com

COSHIELD: The Scope of the UDRP in Trademark Disputes

Not every dispute involving a trade mark and a domain name amounts to cybersquatting. In Polyco Healthline Limited v. David Beatson (WIPO Case No. D2026-1893), the panelist denied the complaint brought against coshield.com, a domain used since 2020 to sell personal protective equipment in the very sector where the complainant has exploited its SHIELD trade mark since 1997, and despite a settlement agreement concluded between the parties in 2021. The decision turns on the moment of acquisition: created in 2014, the domain name appears to have changed hands in May 2020, at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the combination of “Co” and “Shield” could describe the business rather than target Polyco. The evidence being “finely balanced”, bad faith was not established. This article examines why trade mark infringement and cybersquatting are two paths that do not necessarily converge.

23 August 2026
Initially published on iptwins.com

Article Information

Author

Emmanuel Gillet

Publication Date

11 February 2026

Industry

Related Decision(s)

22-cv-384U.S. District Court, Southern District of New YorkU.S. District Court, S.D.N.Y., Hermès International v. Mason Rothschild (MetaBirkins), verdict du 8 février 20232023-02-08
Please select listing to show.

Filter articles

Filter for Topics
Filter for Industries
Filter for Jurisdictions