Things I Learned About Domains from My Interview with Andriy Khvetkevych, CEO of NicNames

In the months since Doma Protocol's mainnet launched, one registrar has processed more on-chain domain volume than any other — and its CEO spent 25 years in traditional domains before touching a blockchain.

That registrar is NicNames, and that CEO is Andriy Khvetkevych. During my recent Discord AMA with Andriy, he laid out a case for on-chain domain ownership that was grounded not in crypto hype but in decades of frustration with the traditional aftermarket's broken settlement infrastructure. NicNames, which says it is the number-one tokenisation registrar by volume on Doma Protocol, is already the top-performing partner on a blockchain that has been processing real transactions since its mainnet launch.

This conversation clarified three things I hadn't fully understood: how DNS-compliant tokenisation differs from ENS, why custodial wallets are essential for domain-industry adoption, and what atomic settlement actually eliminates in a real escrow scenario. I'll also connect Andriy's insights to what I've learned from other guests on this hub: Richard Lau (the domain whale who fractionalised Rides.com), Tom Barrett (the EnCirca founder who built registrars for .bank and .pharmacy), and Elias Benger (the InterNetX CEO managing millions of domains for IONOS Group). The picture they're all painting converges on the same point, and NicNames' transaction volume is the earliest proof that the model works.

Disclosure: This article is based on an AMA with the CEO of NicNames, a company being profiled. web3guides.com has no commercial partnership, advertising agreement, or affiliate relationship with NicNames or D3 Global. The AMA was conducted editorially, and all claims have been independently verified where possible, with unverifiable claims clearly flagged.

Before I explain what NicNames is doing differently, you need to understand the system it's replacing.

The domain aftermarket — the secondary market where people buy and sell previously registered domain names — has existed for roughly thirty years. Industry estimates suggest it generates over $3 billion annually, though that figure includes unreported private transactions and brokered deals; publicly reported sales tracked by platforms like DN Journal and Escrow.com account for a fraction of that total.

Here's how a typical sale unfolds:

1. Find a buyer or seller — through a marketplace like Afternic or Sedo, a broker, or cold outreach

2. Negotiate a price — often through a middleman who takes a commission

3. Open escrow — a third-party service holds the buyer's money while the seller initiates the domain transfer

4. Transfer the domain — the seller pushes the domain to the buyer's registrar account, which involves changing DNS settings and waiting for propagation

5. Release funds — once the buyer confirms receipt, the escrow service releases payment to the seller, minus fees

A straightforward inter-registrar transfer takes 5–7 days under ICANN's transfer policy. When you layer in international wire transfers, escrow processing, disputes, or bank holidays, the end-to-end process can stretch to several weeks. Counterparty risk (the chance that the other side of your deal doesn't hold up their end) is baked into every step.

Andriy has watched this play out for a quarter of a century. As he put it during our AMA: "The domain market never shrinks — every business, every brand needs a domain." The demand side is structurally sound. The problem has always been the plumbing.

• ›Brokers typically charge sellers 10–20% commission, with additional escrow fees (often 3–5%) borne by one or both parties
• ›Settlement windows of one to several weeks lock up capital and create anxiety
• ›International wire transfers add FX conversion costs and compliance friction
• ›Domain theft recovery is a paperwork nightmare because registrar records can be edited
• ›The market operates on business hours in scattered time zones — there is no global, always-on exchange

This is where most explanations go wrong. They frame blockchain domain trading as a "crypto thing." It's not. It's a fix for a broken settlement system that domain professionals have been complaining about for decades. Andriy didn't come to blockchain because he fell down a crypto rabbit hole. He came because he saw infrastructure that could solve problems he'd been staring at since the late 1990s.

What this means for you: If you've ever sold anything through an escrow process and thought "there has to be a better way," you already understand the motivation behind everything NicNames is building.

[VISUAL:stats|## How Doma Protocol Rewires Domain Ownership Under the Hood:$5M|Seed round raised by D3 Global (2023),3.2M+|Total mainnet transactions (verify via Doma explorer),25,500+|Unique wallets on Doma (as of early 2025),6|Registrar partners building on Doma]

To understand NicNames, you first need to understand the infrastructure it's built on.

Doma Protocol (built by D3 Global) is the world's first DNS-compliant blockchain designed specifically for tokenising traditional internet domains. That phrase is doing a lot of work, so let me unpack it.

DNS stands for Domain Name System — the internet's phone book that translates human-readable addresses (like google.com) into the numerical IP addresses that computers actually use. DNS-compliant means Doma doesn't create a parallel naming system the way ENS (Ethereum Name Service) or Handshake does. It works inside the existing DNS infrastructure, which means a domain tokenised on Doma still resolves in every browser on earth without plugins, extensions, or special software.

Technically, Doma is an EVM-compatible Layer 2 built on the OP Stack — the same open-source rollup stack that powers Optimism and Base. Think of it as a specialised blockchain that runs on top of Ethereum, inheriting Ethereum's security while processing domain transactions faster and cheaper.

D3 Global (the company behind Doma) raised a $5 million seed round in 2023. Further funding details, including any subsequent rounds and specific investor participation, should be verified against D3 Global's official announcements. (Note: some earlier versions of this article cited a $25M Series A led by Paradigm in January 2025 — we have been unable to independently verify this figure against Paradigm's public portfolio or D3 Global press releases and have removed the claim pending confirmation. We have also been unable to independently confirm participation by Coinbase Ventures or Sandeep Nailwal in a specific round. If readers have primary sources confirming these details, please contact our editorial team.)

The on-chain metrics since mainnet launch tell the early story: 3.2 million-plus transactions and over 107,000 tokenised domains as of early 2025, according to Doma's public data (these figures should be verified against the Doma block explorer for the most current numbers). The unique wallet count exceeds 25,500, though it's worth noting that unique wallet counts on L2s can be inflated by airdrop farming — one person operating multiple wallets — so this is a proxy for activity rather than a definitive user-adoption metric.

Here's the critical distinction that most coverage misses: Doma is not a registrar. It doesn't sell domains. It's infrastructure that registrars build on top of — the same way Stripe is payment infrastructure that merchants build on. NicNames is the registrar. Doma is the protocol. You buy your domain from NicNames. Doma handles the on-chain tokenisation underneath.

The Dual-Token Model

Doma uses a dual-token model that separates two things that have always been bundled together in traditional domain ownership:

• ›DOTs (Domain Ownership Tokens) represent ownership and transfer rights — think of these as your digital title deed
• ›DSTs (Domain Settings Tokens) represent DNS control — the ability to decide where the domain actually points

(Note: the exact token standard for DOTs and DSTs — whether ERC-721, ERC-1155, or a custom implementation — should be verified against Doma Protocol's technical documentation. Because each domain is unique, ownership tokens would logically be non-fungible rather than fungible ERC-20 tokens. Readers should consult Doma's developer docs for the canonical specification.)

This separation is subtle but powerful. It means you can trade ownership of a domain (by transferring DOTs) while keeping the website live and functional (because the DSTs controlling DNS haven't moved). Or you can delegate DNS management to a technical operator without giving up ownership. For businesses tokenising valuable domains, this is the difference between a useful tool and a non-starter.

However, it's important to understand the governance relationship between these tokens. Key questions to verify against Doma's documentation: Can the new DOT holder force a DST transfer or revoke existing DSTs? What smart contract logic prevents a former owner from redirecting DNS maliciously after selling the DOT? In most standard tokenisations through NicNames, the same entity holds both DOT and DST — the separation is a capability that becomes relevant in advanced use cases (delegation, fractionalisation) rather than the default user experience.

Who Actually Owns the Domain?

This is the most important question the dual-token model raises, and one that requires careful attention: does holding a DOT make you the legal owner of the domain, or does the registrar (NicNames) remain the registrant of record at the registry level?

In the traditional domain system, the registrant of record at the registry (e.g., Verisign for .com) is the legal owner. If NicNames remains the registrant at the registry level and you merely hold a token representing a claim, you have token ownership, not necessarily domain ownership in the legal and ICANN-recognised sense. This distinction matters enormously: in a dispute, the registry-level record likely prevails over on-chain state.

Prospective users should clarify this with NicNames and review Doma's documentation before tokenising high-value domains. The on-chain record provides strong evidence of intent and transaction history, but its legal enforceability as proof of domain ownership may vary by jurisdiction and has not been tested in court.

Comparison with Other Tokenisation Approaches

Doma is not the only project tokenising domains, and a complete picture requires acknowledging alternatives:

• ›ENS (.eth) creates a native blockchain naming system on Ethereum — powerful within the crypto ecosystem but requires ICANN recognition for mainstream browser resolution
• ›Handshake replaces ICANN's root zone entirely with a decentralised alternative — ambitious but creates TLD collision risk and fragmentation
• ›Unstoppable Domains (.crypto, .x, .wallet) tokenises domains outside the ICANN root, with some DNS resolution support but limited browser compatibility without extensions
• ›Doma Protocol tokenises existing ICANN-root domains (.com, .xyz, .ai) without creating a new namespace — maintaining universal browser resolution and UDRP protection

The key differentiator is that Doma works within the existing DNS, while the others build parallel or replacement systems. For domain industry professionals whose assets are ICANN-root domains, Doma is the only approach that tokenises what they already own.

What this means for you: Doma is the settlement layer — like SWIFT for banks. NicNames is the bank branch you walk into. You interact with NicNames; Doma clears the transaction underneath. But unlike a bank, the question of who legally holds your asset at the deepest infrastructure level (the registry) is one you should answer before committing high-value domains.

Before you tokenise anything, it helps to understand what you're tokenising. Here's a quick primer that applies whether you're touching blockchain or not.

A domain name is a human-readable address (like google.com) that maps to an IP address through the DNS. Domains are organised by TLDs (top-level domains) — the extension after the final dot. These break into two main categories: ccTLDs (country codes like .uk, .de, .io) and gTLDs (generic TLDs like .com, .net, .org, plus newer ones like .xyz, .fun, .ai, .shop, and .coffee).

A domain drop is when a registration expires, passes through a grace period, and eventually becomes available for anyone to register again. This is how Richard Lau hand-registered Lau.com back in the mid-1990s — reportedly staying up for an extended session, continuously refreshing, waiting for the domain to drop. (This anecdote is paraphrased from our AMA series; specific details like exact dates and modem speeds should be verified against Richard's own account.)

For beginners entering the market, Richard's advice from our AMA is concrete: focus on two-word branded names (think MikesLandscaping.com), buy them for ~$10 through a registrar, and flip them for ~$30 by contacting businesses that are currently using inferior domain names. He calls this "making your own market." It's not glamorous, but it builds skill.

The sell-through rate reality check is essential: domain portfolios sell at an average of 1.5% per year (ranging from 0.5% to 3%). That means if you own 100 domains, you might sell one or two in a given year. Domain investing rewards patience. Richard's famous rule captures this: "The only way to sell a domain for $1 million is to say no to $900,000."

New gTLDs offer real entry opportunities. Richard specifically highlighted .coffee, .live, .shop, and .ai as extensions where early movers can find value. NicNames' free .fun and .xyz promos are the absolute lowest-risk starting point — you can experience the full tokenisation workflow without committing any capital.

What this means for you: Domain investing doesn't require huge capital. It requires research, patience, and a willingness to contact potential buyers directly. Tokenisation through NicNames adds a new dimension — on-chain liquidity and composability — but the underlying skill of identifying undervalued names remains the foundation.

This is what fascinated me most about my conversation with Andriy. NicNames isn't trying to convince the crypto community to care about domains. It's trying to convince the domain community — millions of registrants, investors, and businesses — to benefit from blockchain without needing to understand it.

The partnership between NicNames and Doma Protocol grew from a shared vision: on-chain domain ownership should be as easy as traditional domain registration. And NicNames is executing on that vision in three specific ways that deserve close attention — along with trade-offs that deserve equal scrutiny.

First: custodial wallet support. When you create a NicNames account and tokenise a domain, NicNames generates a custodial wallet for you. A custodial wallet means NicNames holds the cryptographic keys on your behalf — you don't need to install MetaMask, write down a twelve-word seed phrase, or buy ETH for gas fees. Your experience looks and feels like any other registrar dashboard. The blockchain activity happens underneath, invisible unless you go looking for it.

This is a deliberate strategic choice, not a compromise. The domain industry's user base skews older, more business-focused, and overwhelmingly non-crypto. Asking those users to navigate wallet setup would kill adoption rates before they ever experienced the benefits of on-chain trading. Tom Barrett at EnCirca told me something similar about why Doma is "the first Web3 naming approach capable of going mainstream" — it meets existing users where they are.

However, the custodial trade-off is significant and must be understood. "Not your keys, not your coins" is Web3's foundational security principle, and it applies fully here. When NicNames holds your keys, NicNames controls your tokens. If NicNames is hacked, goes insolvent, or acts maliciously, you could lose access to your tokenised domains. This is structurally similar to the registrar dependency you already have in the traditional system — arguably, it replicates the very centralisation risk that blockchain is supposed to eliminate. For free or low-value domains, custodial convenience is reasonable. For high-value assets, this is a serious consideration that should push you toward self-custody (more on this in the safety section below).

Second: free domain promotions. NicNames offers .fun and .xyz extensions at no cost as entry points. This is the "try before you buy" approach that removes every possible objection. You don't need to risk money to experience what tokenised domain ownership feels like. And .xyz is a particularly smart choice — it's the most Web3-native generic TLD, used by projects like Wines.xyz (the father-son fractionalisation case study I covered earlier in this hub).

Third: AI appraisal tools. Domain pricing has historically been wildly opaque. The same name might sell for $500 or $50,000 depending on who's brokering the deal and how sophisticated the buyer is. NicNames has mentioned AI-powered valuation tools in development, but specific details — data sources, model methodology, accuracy benchmarks, and timeline — have not been publicly disclosed. If delivered, such tools could bring real transparency to domain pricing by surfacing comparable sale data, keyword demand metrics, and traffic estimates. But until there's a working product with published accuracy metrics, this remains an unconfirmed feature rather than a selling point.

• ›NicNames says it is Doma Protocol's #1 tokenisation registrar by volume (independently verify via Doma's public dashboard)
• ›Custodial wallets eliminate the crypto learning curve but introduce custodial risk — NicNames holds your keys
• ›Free .fun and .xyz domains let anyone experience tokenisation with zero financial commitment
• ›AI appraisal tools are in development with no confirmed details on methodology or release date

What this means for you: If you've avoided blockchain domains because the onboarding felt intimidating, NicNames has specifically engineered its experience to remove that friction. But understand what you're trading off: convenience for custody. Visit nicnames.co and claim a free domain to learn the mechanics — but consider self-custody before tokenising anything valuable.

Let me make this concrete with a scenario.

Imagine you own a premium domain worth $50,000 and a buyer in another country wants it. In the traditional path, you'd engage a broker (who charges the seller 10–20%), open escrow (with additional fees of roughly 3–5%), wait for an international wire transfer to clear, initiate the domain transfer through your registrar (5–7 days for a straightforward ICANN inter-registrar transfer, stretching to several weeks when international wires, disputes, or holidays intervene), wait for DNS propagation, and hope the buyer doesn't file a chargeback. Total cost: potentially $5,000–$12,000 in combined commissions and fees.

On Doma Protocol through NicNames, that same sale uses atomic settlement — a mechanism where both sides of the transaction execute simultaneously or not at all. The buyer's payment and the seller's domain tokens (DOTs) swap in a single on-chain transaction. There is no moment where one party has sent their asset and is waiting for the other. No escrow. No broker fee.

How the On-Chain Purchase Actually Works

To make this comparison honest, here's what the on-chain process looks like step by step:

1. Seller lists the tokenised domain on the Doma marketplace with an asking price (denominated in a supported cryptocurrency — verify current payment options on the Doma marketplace, which may include ETH, USDC, or other tokens)

2. Buyer funds their wallet — either through NicNames' custodial wallet (which requires depositing crypto or purchasing it through an integrated on-ramp) or through their own self-custody wallet connected to Doma

3. Buyer initiates the purchase — the smart contract holds both the buyer's payment and the seller's DOT in a single atomic transaction

4. Settlement executes — the DOT transfers to the buyer's wallet and the payment transfers to the seller's wallet in one indivisible operation. If either side fails, neither executes

5. DNS propagation — the DST may need to be transferred or updated separately depending on the configuration, and standard DNS propagation times (minutes to hours) still apply for the domain to resolve at its new destination

An important nuance on "settlement in seconds": On the Doma L2 itself, transaction confirmation is near-instant. However, Doma is an optimistic rollup built on the OP Stack, and final settlement on Ethereum L1 requires the challenge period to expire — typically 7 days for optimistic rollups. For practical purposes, the trade confirms in seconds on the L2 and both parties can act on it immediately, but the ultimate cryptographic finality on Ethereum takes longer. For most users this distinction is academic; for very high-value trades, it's worth understanding.

What About Transaction Costs?

The article would be incomplete without addressing what on-chain trading actually costs. Gas fees on Doma's L2 are significantly lower than Ethereum mainnet (typical of OP Stack rollups), but they are not zero. NicNames may also charge tokenisation fees or marketplace fees. Before comparing on-chain costs favourably to traditional escrow, verify the current fee schedule on NicNames and the Doma marketplace. The honest comparison is: broker commissions (10–20%) are replaced by gas fees (likely pennies to a few dollars per transaction on an L2) plus any platform fees — a substantial saving, but not "free."

What Atomic Settlement Does and Doesn't Eliminate

Andriy was emphatic during our AMA that on-chain domain trading via Doma eliminates settlement counterparty risk — the specific risk that one party delivers their side and the other doesn't. This is a genuine and meaningful improvement.

However, it's important to understand what new risks are introduced:

• ›Smart contract risk: Bugs, exploits, or vulnerabilities in Doma's smart contracts could result in domain token or fund loss. Has Doma been audited? By whom? As of this writing, the audit status and auditor identity should be verified against Doma's documentation. Any protocol asking users to lock real-world assets into smart contracts should have completed and published at least one independent security audit.
• ›Oracle and bridge risk: If the system relies on external data feeds or cross-chain bridges, these introduce additional failure points.
• ›Custodial wallet compromise: If you're using NicNames' custodial wallet, a breach of NicNames' infrastructure could expose your tokens.
• ›Legal enforceability: An on-chain token may not be legally enforceable as proof of domain ownership in all jurisdictions. If there's a conflict between the blockchain record and the registry-level record (Verisign, etc.), the registry record likely prevails.

On-chain provenance does provide better evidence trails for domain theft recovery. Every transfer is permanently recorded on-chain with timestamps. However, domain ownership is ultimately determined by ICANN-accredited registrar records, not blockchain state. On-chain records are strong supplementary evidence that can make recovery adjudication faster, but they don't override the registrar/ICANN hierarchy.

But here's the insight that most coverage misses: fee savings are significant but secondary. The deeper breakthrough is composability. Once a domain exists as an on-chain token, it can be fractionalised (as Richard Lau did with Rides.com), used as collateral in DeFi protocols, or integrated into smart contract logic that doesn't exist in the traditional aftermarket. The fee savings alone don't justify building an entirely new blockchain. The new capabilities do.

Tax Implications of Frictionless Trading

One operational consequence of frictionless trading is that it generates more taxable events, faster. If you're buying and selling domains — even modestly — and generating gains, those profits are taxable in most jurisdictions. The UK's HMRC treats digital asset gains under Capital Gains Tax rules. A tool like Koinly can track your on-chain domain trades automatically, and our crypto tax calculator can help you estimate what you might owe before the tax year closes.

What this means for you: On-chain domain trading eliminates settlement counterparty risk — a genuine breakthrough — and unlocks capabilities (fractionalisation, programmability) that physically cannot exist in the traditional system. But it introduces new risk categories (smart contract bugs, custodial compromise, legal uncertainty) that you should evaluate with the same diligence you'd apply to any financial infrastructure.

[VISUAL:stats|## The Numbers That Explain Why This Opportunity Is Massive:360,000,000|Total registered domains worldwide,107,000+|Domains tokenised on Doma Protocol,~0.03%|Current tokenisation penetration rate,$38M+|Total on-chain volume on Doma mainnet]

There are approximately 360 million domain names registered worldwide. Doma Protocol has tokenised just over 107,000 (as of early 2025 — verify the current figure on Doma's explorer). That's roughly 0.03% penetration.

But the raw penetration calculation requires qualification. Not all 360 million domains are candidates for tokenisation. The vast majority are parked, inactive, held by registrars in bulk, or used by small businesses with no interest in trading them. The realistic addressable market for tokenisation is the subset of domains that are actively traded, held as investments, or managed by domain professionals — likely measured in the low millions rather than hundreds of millions.

According to industry reports, the domain aftermarket sees somewhere in the range of hundreds of thousands to low millions of transactions per year (exact figures are hard to pin down because many sales are private). If we estimate the addressable market at, say, 5–10 million actively traded or investment-held domains, then 107,000 tokenised domains represents roughly 1–2% penetration of the realistic addressable base — still early, but a materially different framing than "0.03% of all domains."

Even with this qualification, significant growth runway exists. The question is whether tokenisation offers enough practical advantages to convert domain professionals who have functioning (if inefficient) workflows today.

Industry estimates suggest the domain aftermarket generates over $3 billion annually (including unreported private transactions). It's been operating for thirty years. The fundamental demand driver — every business, every brand, every project needing a web address — isn't going away. Tom Barrett told me that AI is actually accelerating domain demand: as AI displaces white-collar workers, they become solopreneurs, and each one needs a brand identity and domain. Elias Benger at InterNetX pointed to vibe coding tools lowering the barrier to building web projects, which drives new registrations.

Doma's partner network currently includes six registrars: NicNames, InterNetX, EnCirca, Rumahweb, ConnectReseller, and Interstellar. Each brings different geography, customer segments, and TLD specialisation. NicNames leads by volume (according to NicNames — independently verify via Doma's dashboard), but the multiplicative effect of the whole network matters: every new partner brings an existing customer base that can be converted to on-chain activity without cold-start acquisition.

And here's the liquidity dynamic that Andriy's volume leadership demonstrates: liquidity begets liquidity. More tokenised domains trading on NicNames attracts more buyers. More buyers make NicNames more attractive to sellers considering tokenisation. This creates a reinforcing flywheel that's structurally difficult for later entrants to break.

• ›The realistic addressable market for tokenisation is significantly smaller than 360M total registered domains
• ›Even within the addressable market, tokenisation is still early with meaningful growth potential
• ›Six registrar partners multiply the addressable user base without cold-start acquisition costs
• ›NicNames' volume leadership creates a self-reinforcing liquidity advantage

Important caveat: Tokenisation penetration growth does not guarantee asset appreciation for any individual domain. The growth of the infrastructure is separate from the investment performance of specific tokenised domains. Don't confuse a platform adoption thesis with a guaranteed return on any particular domain purchase.

What this means for you: The question isn't whether domains have value — three decades of aftermarket activity settled that. The question is whether on-chain infrastructure will capture a meaningful percentage of existing transactions. The runway is real, but size it against the addressable market, not total registrations.

No honest assessment of tokenised domains can omit the risks. Here are the ones you need to understand before committing assets.

Renewal Risk and Registrar Dependency

Tokenised domains still require annual renewal at the registry level (Verisign for .com, etc.). Your on-chain DOT is only meaningful as long as the underlying domain registration remains active. If NicNames goes bankrupt, ceases operations, or loses its registrar agreement with the registry, what happens to your tokenised domain?

In theory, Doma Protocol's architecture separates the on-chain token from any single registrar's infrastructure — you should be able to transfer your domain to another Doma-compatible registrar. In practice, the mechanics of this failover are not fully documented publicly. If NicNames is the registrant of record at the registry level (rather than you personally), their insolvency could jeopardise your domain even if you hold the DOT. This is the single most important risk for anyone considering tokenising a domain. Before tokenising high-value names, confirm: who is the registrant of record at the registry, and what happens to that record if the registrar ceases operations?

ICANN's Position on Domain Tokenisation

ICANN governs the domain name system through the Registrar Accreditation Agreement (RAA), which has specific provisions about domain transfers and ownership records. As of this writing, ICANN has not issued specific guidance on domain tokenisation. This creates regulatory uncertainty: ICANN could potentially intervene if it determines that tokenised transfers circumvent its transfer policies.

Whether on-chain DOT transfers constitute "domain transfers" under the RAA — or whether they're simply changes in beneficial ownership while the registrar remains the registrant of record — is an unresolved question. Regulatory clarity from ICANN would significantly de-risk the space; the absence of that clarity is itself a risk.

UDRP (Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy) Interaction

Domain disputes are resolved through UDRP proceedings at WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization). If a tokenised domain becomes the subject of a UDRP complaint, what happens? Does the token get burned? Does the registrar override the on-chain record? Can a UDRP panel order a transfer that conflicts with the blockchain state?

These are real operational questions for anyone tokenising valuable domains — particularly brandable or trademark-adjacent names. The likely answer is that UDRP outcomes are enforced at the registrar/registry level, which would override the on-chain record. But this means the "immutable on-chain ownership" narrative has a significant asterisk: legal and ICANN-mandated processes can supersede blockchain state.

Smart Contract and Technical Risk

As discussed in the escrow comparison section, smart contract bugs, exploits, or vulnerabilities in Doma's contracts could result in domain token or fund loss. Verify Doma's audit status before committing high-value assets. Additionally, as a relatively new L2, Doma's track record is limited compared to more established chains.

Legal Jurisdiction Uncertainty

An on-chain token's legal status as proof of ownership may vary by jurisdiction. The intersection of blockchain records, registrar records, and national property law is largely untested in courts. Don't assume that holding a DOT gives you the same legal protections as being the registrant of record at the registry.

What this means for you: Tokenised domains offer genuine improvements in trading efficiency and composability, but they don't eliminate risk — they change its nature. Understand the renewal dependency, ICANN uncertainty, UDRP interaction, and smart contract risks before tokenising anything you can't afford to lose.

One of the most important things Andriy's work at NicNames enables is something that was impossible before Doma Protocol: fractionalisation — splitting ownership of a high-value domain into tradeable on-chain tokens so multiple people can own a piece.

Richard Lau — the domain whale who owns Rides.com, Resume.com, Short.com, and a portfolio of other premium names — fractionalised Rides.com on Doma Protocol. This allows investors to hold fractional ownership of a domain that might trade in the seven-to-nine figure range without requiring a full sale. It unlocks liquidity on assets that would otherwise sit dormant for years waiting for the right single buyer.

Tomasso and Alessandro, the father-son team behind Wines.xyz, took fractionalisation a step further: their token holders can mint subdomains (like mike.wines.xyz) as human-readable crypto wallet addresses. That's real utility beyond speculation — a subdomain that functions as your identity across Web3.

Tomasso's investing philosophy — "Pristine and Rare" — applies directly here. He only invests in things that are genuinely uncommon AND flawless in quality. He applied this framework to wine, domains, Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Nvidia (which he bought at ~$20 and held through to $8,000-plus). His assessment of domains versus physical real estate for tokenisation was blunt: "Way better asset for tokenization — you can see the website, verify the smart contract lock, check registration. No leaks, no tenant headaches, no inspections."

If you're holding crypto while waiting for domain appreciation, idle assets can earn yield elsewhere. Our staking calculator can show you what your holdings could generate in the meantime.

What this means for you: Fractionalisation democratises access to premium domains — you don't need six figures to own a piece of Rides.com-calibre digital real estate. NicNames and Doma make this mechanically possible; the question becomes which domains justify the fractionalisation — and whether the legal and custodial risks outlined above are acceptable for your situation.

[VISUAL:comparison|## Why ICANN Compliance Is the Whole Game:Doma Protocol (DNS-Compliant)|Universal browser resolution (no plugins),UDRP trademark protection via ICANN,No TLD collision risk (uses ICANN root),Legal enforcement through national courts,Tokenises traditional domains (.com .xyz .ai)|||ENS / Handshake / Unstoppable Domains|Requires browser plugins or extensions,No trademark dispute mechanism,TLD-level collision risk exists,Minimal or no legal enforcement,Creates new namespaces (.eth .crypto)]

This is where most explanations of "blockchain domains" go wrong. They lump everything together — ENS, Handshake, Unstoppable Domains, Doma — as if they're variations on the same idea. They're not. The difference is fundamental.

ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) manages the single authoritative root of the internet's naming system. It governs which TLDs exist, accredits registrars, and provides UDRP (Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy) — the mechanism for resolving trademark disputes. Every browser on earth resolves domains through ICANN's root.

ENS (.eth), Handshake, and Unstoppable Domains (.crypto, .x, .wallet) created alternative namespaces — new naming systems that operate outside ICANN. Tom Barrett, who built EnCirca as an ICANN-accredited registrar for high-trust TLDs like .bank and .pharmacy, laid out the problems in our AMA: no universal resolution (you need plugins), collision risk at the TLD level, no UDRP enforcement for trademark disputes, no accountability for bad actors, and fragmented ecosystems. His verdict: "friction = death for adoption." Richard Lau reinforced it: "They need ICANN recognition to go mainstream — friction kills adoption."

It's worth noting that Unstoppable Domains has made progress on DNS resolution for some of its extensions and has built integrations with certain browsers and applications. The landscape is evolving, and the distinction between "ICANN-compliant" and "alternative namespace" may become less binary over time. But as of now, the resolution gap remains significant.

Doma Protocol sidesteps the namespace problem entirely because it doesn't create a new namespace. It tokenises domains that already exist within ICANN's root. A .com tokenised on Doma is still a .com that resolves in Chrome, Safari, Firefox, and every other browser. It still has UDRP protection. It still has legal enforceability. The blockchain layer adds programmability and on-chain trading — it doesn't replace the DNS infrastructure that makes the domain functional.

For NicNames' business and enterprise customers, this isn't a technical detail. It's the entire value proposition. No IT department is going to approve a naming system that requires browser extensions. No legal team is going to accept a namespace without trademark dispute resolution. ICANN compliance is what makes Doma — and by extension NicNames — viable for the mainstream market that alternative Web3 naming systems have failed to reach.

What this means for you: If someone tries to sell you on a blockchain domain that requires a special browser extension to resolve, you now know the question to ask: "Does it work inside the ICANN root?" If the answer is no, you're buying into a parallel system with a fraction of the internet's reach.

[VISUAL:checklist|## Keeping Your Tokenised Domains Safe:Domain Tokenisation Safety Checklist|Start with a free or low-value domain to learn the mechanics before tokenising premium names,Understand DOTs (ownership) vs DSTs (DNS control) and know which you are transferring in any trade,If using NicNames' custodial wallet know that NicNames holds keys — consider self-custody for high-value assets,Verify your domain's on-chain status on the Doma blockchain before and after any transaction,Secure your NicNames account with a strong unique password and two-factor authentication,For self-custody store seed phrases offline and use a hardware wallet for four-figure-plus domains]

NicNames' custodial wallet approach is effective for onboarding, but it's critical to understand the security trade-offs at each level of involvement.

Custodial wallets (what NicNames provides by default) mean NicNames holds the cryptographic keys to your on-chain assets. You log in with a username and password like any other website. The upside: zero crypto complexity. The critical trade-off: NicNames is a single point of failure. If NicNames is hacked, goes insolvent, or experiences prolonged downtime, you lose access to your tokens. This is structurally similar to the registrar dependency in the traditional system — you've replaced one central custodian with another. For free or low-value domains used for learning, this is perfectly reasonable. For anything of material value, think carefully.

Self-custody means you hold your own keys — typically through a hardware wallet like a Ledger — and no one else can access your DOTs and DSTs. Once you're tokenising domains worth four figures or more, self-custody becomes worth the learning curve. Your private keys stay offline, meaning your domain tokens are protected even if NicNames' infrastructure is compromised.

The DOT/DST separation itself is a security feature. Because ownership tokens and DNS control tokens are distinct, you can transfer ownership while maintaining DNS stability — or delegate DNS management without relinquishing title. This granularity doesn't exist in traditional domain ownership, where selling means handing over everything simultaneously.

A question I want to flag honestly: what happens to a tokenised domain if NicNames experiences downtime or goes offline? Doma Protocol's architecture should separate the on-chain token from any single registrar's infrastructure, but the precise mechanics of this fallback are worth understanding before tokenising high-value assets. Specifically: can you migrate your domain to another Doma-compatible registrar if NicNames ceases operations? Is there a documented process for this? The separation between Doma (protocol layer) and NicNames (registrar layer) provides structural protection in theory, but "should" is not a guarantee — ask for documentation.

What this means for you: Start with a free .fun or .xyz domain on NicNames' custodial setup. Learn how DOTs and DSTs work. Once you're comfortable — and once the domains in question justify it — graduate to self-custody for your most valuable tokenised assets. And regardless of custody method, remember that the underlying domain still requires annual renewal at the registry level.

The order of these steps matters, and here's why.

You create the NicNames account first because every subsequent action — domain selection, wallet generation, tokenisation — flows through their interface. Claiming a free domain before you've handled any crypto means your first experience with tokenisation costs you nothing and risks nothing. The custodial wallet generates automatically because NicNames designed the flow so you never encounter a "now install MetaMask" gate. Your domain tokens arrive in that wallet without you doing anything technical. And exploring the Doma marketplace comes last because it only makes sense once you actually hold a tokenised domain and can see your DOTs and DSTs in context.

The whole process takes minutes, not days. And because NicNames offers free .fun and .xyz domains, the total cost of your education is exactly zero.

Once you're on the Doma marketplace at app.doma.xyz/join/4urmvv4ouvvsu, you can browse what's trading, see price history, and get a feel for the market before committing any real capital.

What this means for you: Don't overthink it. The gap between "curious about tokenised domains" and "holding one" is about five minutes and zero pounds. Start there — and once you've experienced the mechanics, revisit the risks section above before scaling up.

NicNames is the volume leader (by its own account), but it's not operating alone. Doma Protocol's registrar partner network gives you a sense of how broad the infrastructure play really is.

InterNetX, part of the IONOS Group (one of Europe's largest domain registrar groups), manages millions of domains across thousands of TLDs at enterprise scale. Elias Benger, their CEO, told me what attracted them to Doma: "They're not selling a product, they're selling a platform — infrastructure anyone can build on. If we get users on it, everybody wins." InterNetX brings the European enterprise market and a customer base that measures domains in the millions.

EnCirca, founded by Tom Barrett, specialises in high-trust, regulated TLDs like .bank, .pharmacy, and .post — extensions that require verified identity to register. EnCirca's presence on Doma signals that the protocol meets the compliance bar for the most regulated corners of the domain industry.

Rumahweb, ConnectReseller, and Interstellar round out the partner roster, adding geographic reach across Asia-Pacific and reseller networks that extend Doma's distribution further.

Each partner brings something NicNames alone cannot: different customer segments, different regions, different TLD specialisations. The diversity of the partner network is the thesis in miniature — Doma succeeds by being infrastructure that many registrars adopt, not by being one registrar that tries to do everything.

What this means for you: If NicNames doesn't serve your specific geographic market or TLD needs, other Doma partners might. The protocol is the constant; the registrar is the variable. Check InterNetX and EnCirca as alternatives — same on-chain infrastructure, different registrar experience.

I owe you honesty about the things I don't yet know — and that Andriy's AMA didn't fully resolve.

What specifically drives NicNames' volume lead? Is it the size of their existing customer base, their marketing spend, their geographic focus, or the effectiveness of their free domain promos? Probably some combination, but the precise formula isn't public — and the "number one by volume" claim is self-reported and should be verified against Doma's public dashboard.

Who is the registrant of record at the registry level after tokenisation? If NicNames remains the registrant of record and the DOT holder merely has a beneficial claim, the legal ownership picture is more nuanced than "hold the token, own the domain." This is the most consequential unanswered question in the space.

How will NicNames' AI appraisal tools work technically? They're in development, and the concept is compelling, but details on data sources, methodology, accuracy metrics, and release timeline aren't available yet.

How does the custodial model handle regulatory scrutiny across jurisdictions? Holding crypto keys on behalf of users may trigger different regulatory obligations depending on where the user is located. NicNames' approach to this isn't something we covered in depth.

Has Doma Protocol been independently audited? Smart contract audits are standard practice for protocols asking users to lock value into contracts. The audit status and auditor identity should be confirmed before committing high-value assets.

What are the actual all-in costs? Gas fees on Doma, NicNames' tokenisation fees, marketplace fees — the full cost picture needs transparency for the escrow comparison to be honest.

What's the long-term governance of Doma Protocol? There is no $DOMA governance token. The protocol is run by D3 Global. How governance evolves as the network grows is an open question.

How does ICANN view tokenised transfers? The absence of explicit ICANN guidance creates regulatory ambiguity that could resolve favourably or unfavourably.

These aren't dealbreakers — they're areas to watch. The underlying idea is sound: an industry veteran running a high-volume registrar on DNS-compliant infrastructure with a growing partner network. But "sound idea" and "no open questions" are different things, and I'd rather flag the gaps than pretend they don't exist.

• ›Claim a free .fun or .xyz domain at NicNames to experience tokenisation firsthand
• ›On-chain domain trading eliminates settlement counterparty risk but introduces new risk categories (smart contract, custodial, legal) — understand both sides
• ›The realistic addressable market for tokenisation is smaller than 360M total domains but still represents significant early-stage growth potential
• ›DNS compliance (not a parallel namespace) is what separates Doma from ENS, Handshake, and Unstoppable Domains
• ›Start with custodial wallets for convenience; graduate to self-custody for high-value assets — and understand that NicNames holding your keys means NicNames controls your tokens
• ›Before tokenising high-value domains, clarify: who is the registrant of record at the registry, what happens if the registrar ceases operations, and has the protocol been audited?