.library
Is .library a real TLD? Who’s applying to run it?
Nobody has applied for .library in its own right, as of 7 October 2026. Starlight (Namecheap) named .library as a backup string for two of its applications: .lab and .folio. ICANN deactivated those backups, because another applicant applied for the same string or named it as a backup.
A clear real word, but libraries already have trusted web addresses, so most uptake would be cheap or defensive, not a main identity.
public, academic and special libraries and library-services vendors, plus developers and creators naming code, asset or media libraries
Nobody has applied for .library in its own right.
Named on the ICANN gTLD application list, 7 October 2026 as a replacement (backup) string of the applicant's .folio application, shown as deactivated: another applicant applied for the same string or named it as a backup
Named on the ICANN gTLD application list, 7 October 2026 as a replacement (backup) string of the applicant's .lab application, shown as deactivated: another applicant applied for the same string or named it as a backup
The 2012 applications making the most similar bet. Chosen by AI from every string in that round, without being told what happened to any of them.
Same bet: a generic singular noun naming a cultural institution, where the natural primary-identity holders are a finite set of modestly funded, locally named physical institutions rather than brands, plus a secondary metaphorical sense (an image gallery, a digital library) that the registry has to hope broadens demand.
Same bet shape — an institution-category noun whose core registrants are place-bound venues and the sector's associations, non-commercial in character and spelled as the word itself — but a theatre sells tickets to a public, so the commercial motive to own the identity is stronger than a library's.
Same bet: the plain generic name of a public, locally funded knowledge institution that people and institutions would put their whole identity on, with the same requirement that thousands of civic bodies migrate off their existing .org/.gov/municipal addresses — differing mainly in scale, since the school base is an order of magnitude larger and better funded.
What a .library domain is
.library is not a TLD yet. It is a string on our record of the ICANN 2026 new gTLD round, in our Culture category. Nobody has applied for .library in its own right. It is named on ICANN’s list as part of an application for another string.
Is the .library domain extension real yet?
.library is not yet a domain extension you can register: nothing resolves under it, and no registrar sells names in it. Nobody has applied for it on the public record; the ICANN 2026 new gTLD round is the process that would decide whether it becomes one.
When can you buy a .library domain?
You can’t yet. A .library name can only be registered once the string is delegated (added to the DNS root) and its registry opens. Last round's closest parallel to .library was .gallery, delegated on 14 November 2013.
Is .library a real TLD?
Not yet. .library is not in the DNS root, so nothing resolves under it. It’s here because ICANN’s list names .library as part of an application for another string. Every entry on this page links to its source.
“CEI2660T-T30004 · Capella Exploration, Inc. · replacement string of .folio · Deactivated WEI2642T-T36415 · Wezen Exploration, Inc. · replacement string of .lab · Deactivated”ICANN
- Band chosen: 30-49, usable but limited. The string is an unambiguous dictionary word with two plausible buyer groups: institutional libraries, and software or asset 'libraries' (code packages, icon sets, stock or media archives). Institutional libraries are mostly publicly funded bodies that already hold entrenched identities on national, municipal, educational or non-profit namespaces, and they are low-willingness-to-pay buyers; by analogy with sponsored or institutional strings such as .museum, which saw thin uptake despite an exact category match (analogy, no figures), the institutional side is unlikely to move primary identity over the next 5 years. The developer-side use is the more interesting demand, by analogy with how developer-facing strings gained genuine primary-identity use once a credible operator distributed them (analogy), but it competes with established package-registry and code-hosting conventions. Not the band above (50-69) because there is no evidence of sustained demand or genuine primary-identity use, only a plausible rationale; not the band below (10-29) because the word is serious, generic and category-exact rather than vanity or joke, and a registrar-affiliated operator (both recorded applications are from Namecheap entities, status deactivated, filed as replacement strings of .folio and .lab) could drive price-led registration volume. Aftermarket would be thin: the string adds description, not credibility. Main market uncertainty: whether developer and creator naming of code and asset libraries produces real primary-identity sites rather than redirects and parked names.