1991 Registration, Subject of UDRP (Updated)

A UDRP was filed at the National Arbitration Forum (NAF) against the domain name. The  filing can be seen at, and it is case #1743189. has been registered for over 25 years. It was created in November of 1991, and it has not expired since that time. I don’t regularly see domain names this old, let alone seeing a UDRP filed against a domain name that has existed for so long. has had Whois privacy on it for over ten years. Because of the UDRP filing, I was able to see the name of the current domain registrant. Using the Whois History Tool at DomainTools, I was able to see that the registrant has been the same since at least December of 2004. I am not sure if the current registrant is connected to the former owner from pre-2004.

If you visit right now, you can see what appears to be a default Network Solutions landing page with PPC links. Beyond my recognition of the landing page design, the “Worldnic” nameservers would seem to indicate that this is a Network Solutions registrar landing page rather than something controlled by the domain owner.

Because the UDRP was filed at NAF, the complainant is unknown at this time. There are so many Google search results for “Starr” that I can’t even take a guess about who filed the UDRP. Starr is a common last name (including that of the founder of the Pan-Mass Challenge), and there are many companies that have “Starr” in their branding. Heck, even Wikipedia’s page about “Starr” has links to over thirty internal pages that people could be interested in learning about when they search for “Starr.” This is just the tip of the iceberg as evidenced by the 899 company results on LinkedIn that are returned when searching for Starr.

From my perspective, when there are so many people, companies, geographic areas, organizations, and other entities with the matching keyword of a UDRP, the complainant shouldn’t be able to win unless there are significantly mitigating circumstances involved. I will be monitoring the progress of this UDRP, but from the outset, I don’t see how the complainant will prevail given the nature and age of the domain name.

Update: The complainant in this UDRP was C.V. Starr & Co., Inc. / Starr International Company, Inc. Looks like I was wrong as the complainant won the UDRP. The domain owner did not respond to the UDRP. The UDRP decision can be found here.

Elliot Silver
Elliot Silver
About The Author: Elliot Silver is an Internet entrepreneur and publisher of Elliot is also the founder and President of Top Notch Domains, LLC, a company that has closed eight figures in deals. Please read the 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. hello Elliot

    If you look at the history for the domain, it has not been used before. Who made the important complaint here. We do not see it yet. If a company has made it, it will probably be transferred.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Recent Posts

Poll: Are You Going to ICANN 79?

The ICANN 79 Community Forum Meeting is coming up in a couple of weeks. The meeting will be held in Puerto Rico from March...

Domain Broker’s Ad Campaign Highlighted by X Business with a Repost from Elon Musk

When looking at domain investor Twitter, I've noticed a few promoted/advertising tweets mentioning Rob Schutz and/or I recently wrote about Rob and his...

NameJet Announces Platform Enhancements

Last Summer, NameJet made some "big changes" to its platform. In essence, NameJet appears to have become a clone of Snapnames, its sister auction...

Rationale Behind Acquisition

It's not often that we hear from the founders of a company to discuss why they spent what they did to acquire a specific...

.Bet Domain Name Acquired for 5 Figures, Reportedly Resold for $600k

According to a tweet from Identity Digital (formerly Donuts), the domain name reportedly sold for $600,000. I have not verified or researched the...