<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">

	<channel>

	<title>&#45; CircleID</title>
	<link>https://www.circleid.com/blogs/</link>
	<description>Postings from  on CircleID</description>
	<dc:language>en</dc:language>
	<dc:rights>Copyright 2026, unless where otherwise noted.</dc:rights>
	<dc:date>2026-03-31T21:29:00+00:00</dc:date>

	
	<item>
		<title> Logical Deduction on Why New TLDs Will Not Increase Costs for Trademark Holders (Featured Blog)</title>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">https://circleid.com/posts20090202_new_tlds_no_increase_cost_trademark_holders</guid>
		<link>https://circleid.com/posts20090202_new_tlds_no_increase_cost_trademark_holders</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Paul Stahura published a <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20090202_analysis_domain_names_registered_new_gtlds/" >great report</a> demonstrating that trademark holders have historically not been blocking their names across multiple Top-Level Domains (TLDs). I have always been a fan of number crunching -- "numbers never lie". Since Paul has already done a remarkable job of statistical analysis, I am going to wear my theorist hat and prove a reworded form of the Hypothesis using logical deduction and common sense... <a href="https://circleid.com/posts20090202_new_tlds_no_increase_cost_trademark_holders">More...</a>]]></description>
		<dc:date>2026-03-31T14:29:00-07:00</dc:date>
	</item>
	

	</channel>
</rss>