When .com Becomes .om: Why Oman’s Policy Change Matters for Brands
Recent changes to Oman’s .om domain registration policies provide a clear example of how well intentioned liberalisation can alter the digital risk landscape.
14 Jan 2026
Read now
Discussions around Internet governance have increasingly moved into geopolitical and institutional arenas. The WSIS+20 review process, alongside initiatives such as the Global Digital Compact, raised a key question for the Internet ecosystem: would longstanding multistakeholder governance models be preserved, or would we see a gradual shift toward more centralised, intergovernmental approaches?
These concerns were widely discussed within the community, including at ICANN 84 in Dublin, where many stakeholders highlighted the importance of preserving stable, inclusive and technically informed governance frameworks.
In a period of growing pressure for greater governmental control, WSIS+20 became an important test of what model would guide the Internet’s future. Against this backdrop, the adoption by consensus of the WSIS+20 Outcome Document, (a UN agreed text setting out shared priorities for the next phase of WSIS), is a significant and reassuring development
Before exploring why WSIS+20 matters, it is helpful to understand what it actually is.
WSIS+20 refers to the 20 year review of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), a United Nations-led initiative originally held in 2003 (Geneva) and 2005 (Tunis). WSIS set out a global vision for how the Internet and digital technologies should support economic growth, social development and broader access to information worldwide.
The “+20” milestone marks a moment for the global community to take stock of two decades of progress, review what has worked and identify what needs to change. It brings together governments, international organisations, the private sector, civil society, and the technical community to discuss key issues such as digital inclusion, security online and crucially, how the Internet should be governed.
In that sense, WSIS+20 is not simply a retrospective. It is a strategic process that helps define the future direction of global digital policy, including whether Internet governance will continue to be shaped through multistakeholder collaboration, or whether it risks shifting toward more centralised and intergovernmental approaches.
The WSIS+20 Outcome Document reaffirms multistakeholder governance as the foundation of the Internet’s future. This is not merely a policy statement: it reinforces a model that has enabled the Internet to scale globally while remaining open, interoperable and resilient.
By avoiding the creation of new, overlapping governance structures and by reaffirming existing frameworks, the document favours continuity, cooperation and pragmatism over fragmentation and centralisation.
For ICANN and the broader technical community, the outcome is clearly reinforces existing roles and processes. It confirms the legitimacy of bottom-up, consensus-based processes and recognises the distinct role of technical operators in maintaining the stability and security of the Internet’s core infrastructure.
The renewed support for a strengthened but non-prescriptive Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is also critical. It preserves the IGF as a space for dialogue and coordination, without transforming it into a regulatory body that could duplicate or undermine existing mechanisms.
For businesses managing domain portfolios and online brand protection across markets, governance stability directly supports long term strategy and investment decisions. Beyond institutional considerations, the WSIS+20 outcome has practical implications for businesses and Internet users alike:
For organisations that rely on domain names, digital infrastructure and online brand presence, governance stability matters. Reaffirming multistakeholder models reduces the risk of abrupt policy shifts, fragmented rules or jurisdiction-driven constraints.
Multistakeholder governance ensures that policy discussions remain connected to technical and operational realities. This is essential for avoiding well-intentioned but impractical rules that could negatively impact innovation, security or scalability.
Clear, predictable governance frameworks support long-term planning and investment. Whether for registries, registrars, platforms or brand owners, confidence in the governance model underpins trust in the ecosystem.
WSIS+20 also serves as a reminder that multistakeholder governance does not maintain itself automatically. It requires continuous engagement from all parts of the ecosystem, including the private sector and the technical community, to ensure that expertise and operational experience continue to inform global policy discussions.
The introduction of mechanisms such as the Informal Multistakeholder Sounding Board (IMSB) during the WSIS+20 process shows that inclusive and constructive dialogue is possible, even in complex multilateral environments.
The WSIS+20 Outcome Document should be seen as a foundation, not an endpoint. Challenges remain, from sustainable IGF funding to ensuring broad and meaningful participation across regions, but the overall direction is clear.
For the Internet ecosystem, and for those who depend on it every day, the message is straightforward: The Internet works best when governance is shared, technically informed, and built on cooperation rather than control.
Recent changes to Oman’s .om domain registration policies provide a clear example of how well intentioned liberalisation can alter the digital risk landscape.
The environmental impact of owning a domain name is relatively low compared to other digital activities, but it is not zero.
The United Kingdom (UK) has introduced a new Crime and Policing Bill l ("The Bill") to help fight the rise in cybercrime.