QW.com UDRP Denied Due to “Fraudster”

A UDRP was filed at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) against the valuable 2 letter QW.com domain name. The complaint was a bit confusing, pitting the Complainant, Quickware, Inc. / Williams Fred, against Quickware, represented by Fred Williams, as the Respondent.

The sole panelist, Scott Blackmer, ruled in favor of the domain registrant in this UDRP. The decision was published on the WIPO website this morning. Based on my reading of the decision, it appears that someone impersonated the domain registrant in an attempt to wrest control over this high value domain name using the fairly inexpensive UDRP:

“As explained above, (a) the record indicates that the Complainant is a fraudster impersonating the Respondent, (b) there is no evidence in the record that Quickware Inc. actually continues to exist as a legal entity, and (c) the trademark cited by the Complainant is held by an entirely unrelated company in any event, Qujickware Engineering & Design LLC of Waltham, Massachusetts. There is no trademark on which to ground a UDRP complaint even if the Complainant were a proper party.

Thus, even if the Complaint were allowed despite the apparent fraudulent nature of the proceeding, the first element of the Complaint would not be established.”

Frankly, I am surprised we don’t see more of these types of cases. There is a fairly low bar required to file a UDRP, and the cost compared to the value of a great domain name is pretty low. Someone could submit publicly available information in the hopes of convincing a panelist it is their domain name, and if the UDRP is unanswered by the domain registrant, a panelist could easily rubber stamp the decision. Fortunately, Mr. Blackmer did not do this. I hope WIPO and NAF highlight this case to other UDRP panelists to be on the lookout for something like this in the future.

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 COMMENT

  1. It’s not the first time this sort of thing has been attempted. I can recall off the top of my head two prior schemes – one using a forged trademark certificate, and another one using similar fake credentials – at WIPO, and two others involving impersonators/fakes at ADRForum.

    As the TRX.com dispute showed, there are UDRP panelists who don’t even bother to check the ownership of a claimed trademark registration, so the UDRP is ripe for this sort of thing.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Recent Posts

Have a Real Presence Online When Selling Domain Names

0
When it comes to selling domain names via outbound marketing, credibility is very important. If a prospective buyer receives an unsolicited and unexpected email...

2021 vs 2025 – % of .coms in my Portfolio

1
I don't closely track the percentage of domain extensions in my portfolio. I could have 75% .com or I could have 99% .com domain...

Nominations Open for 2026 ICA Awards

0
The Internet Commerce Association (ICA) is now accepting nominations for two domain investing community awards. Domain investors may now submit their nominations for the...

Bodis Gives Performance Update After Google Parked Domain Opt-Out

3
Bodis sent an update to customers yesterday about recent performance impacts related to pay per click parking revenue. The company attributed the decline to...

Glad This Sale Wasn’t an LTO

0
Sometimes, the most obvious use for a particular domain name is in a manner that would either be offensive, controversial, or negative. This will...