After $4k+ Sale, UDRP Filed on UOVO.com (Updated)

I was looking through the newest UDRP filings this morning at the World Intellectual Property Organization, and I came across a UDRP that was filed on the 4 letter .com UOVO.com domain name. The UDRP was filed by a company called Uovo Art LLC, and it is WIPO Case D2016-0214.

When I did a Whois search to see the current owner of the domain name, I saw that it was privately registered at NameBright and had a 2015 creation date. I was curious if this might have been a DropCatch auction due to the registration date and registrar. I then looked at NameBio to see if there are any public sales records. Sure enough, according to NameBio, “UOVO.COM last sold for $4,125 on 2015-09-12 at DropCatch.”

At the present time, UOVO.com has a “for sale” landing page, and the domain name appears to have an asking price of $125,000. As we know, selling domain names is a legitimate business enterprise.

I did a Whois history search on the domain name using DomainTools, and it appears that the domain name was previously owned by someone based in Italy prior to its expiration and deletion. I did a Google  search for Uovo Art LLC, and I came across a company that operates on UOVO.org. The terms and conditions page mentions “UOVO ART LLC” so it is possible that this company is the complainant.

Until the UDRP decision is published with more information about the complainant, I won’t know who filed the UDRP and why they believe they have the rights to this domain name. During the last couple of years, LLLL.com and other short domain names have gone up in value considerably. It will be interesting to learn more about the case once the UDRP decision is published. Once I see that a decision has been rendered, I will try to update this article.

Update: UDRP has been denied, and the decision can be read on WIPO’s website. John Berryhill represented the domain owner who has retained the domain name. The most relevant aspect of the decision was the following “The Respondent has presented a plausible claim that the disputed domain name was registered based on its attractiveness as a dictionary word or descriptive term. It is not a violation of the Policy to register a domain name and offer it for sale to the public where such use is not seeking to profit from and exploit the trademark of another.”

Elliot Silver
Elliot Silver
About The Author: Elliot Silver is an Internet entrepreneur and publisher of DomainInvesting.com. Elliot is also the founder and President of Top Notch Domains, LLC, a company that has closed eight figures in deals. Please read the DomainInvesting.com Terms of Use page for additional information about the publisher, website comment policy, disclosures, and conflicts of interest. Reach out to Elliot: Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn
  1. LOL, Acro first thought I had too, $1500 name. Good ole Namejet “where the suckers buy”. I am kidding of course not all buyers are suckers just 80-90%.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Recent Posts

‘Then Why is it Still for Sale?’

2
In a sales negotiation for my higher value domain names, I am frequently asked something along the lines of this: "If the domain name...

How I Deal with GoDaddy one-time-use support PIN

0
There are few things more disconcerting than knowing someone is attempting to do something with one of my domain names without permission. That's how...

Efty Pay Launches Today

0
In a blog post published this morning, Efty announced its Efty Pay platform was launched today. The domain sales payment platform is launching in...

Former Mode CEO Shares Mode.com Acquisition Price

3
Several years ago, Mode made an important domain name acquisition. The company had been using ModeAnalytics.com, and it acquired the brand matching Mode.com domain...

What Afternic Needs to Fix / Add on New Landers

4
Yesterday, I wrote about the new Afternic landing pages that look similar to the Dan landers but with a GoDaddy logo and url. I...