However in August of 1994, an industry crisis lead to a request for direct Commission involvement upon realization that the industry managed plan was in all likelihood headed toward total depletion of toll free numbers prior to the scheduled introduction of new codes in April 1996. In response, the Commission enacted emergency efforts to conserve the existing pool of numbers and initiated a proposed rulemaking to solicit comments on the means for fair allocation of numbers, including those with vanity value. Combined industry and government efforts are underway to expand the Service Access Code base to meet anticipated demand. However this approach has created concern by those already holding vanity numbers. In some cases, the vanity number holder has trademarked their vanity label, though not the underlying number, and invested heavily to promote its awareness.
Legitimate concerns arise regarding possible public confusion and fraud.
Similar questions arise in the Internet community as it attempts to expand its name base through the introduction of new top level domains. It is not difficult to configure numerous other near identical domain names using either geographic or generic top levels. The geographic scope of the Internet problem is larger than that for vanity numbers due to the global reach of Internet. Given the financial investment firms may have in advertising and promoting their network labels, it is likely that some will seek the authority of intellectual property law to protect their interests. Additionally, the question remains if that right is provided, should the current holders be permitted to exercise that right free of charge or should be required to pay for the first right of refusal, a one time fee assessed on the subscriber or through a competitive bidding process.