UDRP Filed on Quebec.com

This morning, I was looking through the recent UDRP filings at the World Intellectual Property Organization, and I saw an aggravating one that should almost certainly be denied, hopefully with a finding of Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. The Ministre des Relations internationales, de la Francophonie et du Commerce extérieur (Department of International Relations)  has filed a UDRP for the Quebec.com domain name.

Quebec.com is owned by Anything.com, Ltd., a company that owns a large portfolio of exceptional keyword domain names, including YL.com, YE.com, 10.com, and many others. The company has owned this domain name since for at least 10 years  and probably much longer than that (Whois history records for this name stop in 2003 and it has a 1998 creation date). That almost certainly means that Ari Goldberger of the ESQwire law firm will respond to the complaint.

Ari is no stranger to geographical UDRP decisions, having won a number of them. In fact, in the LomaLinda.com UDRP  which Ari successfuly defended, the panelist stated, “the general rule that geographic names are not subject to trademark protection.”  

I think it’s ridiculous that a UDRP would be filed against a geodomain name like Quebec.com. The UDRP system and legal system have ruled in favor of domain name owners far more often than the complainants. Just a few such cases include  Pocatello.com,  MyrtleBeach.com,  Barcelona.com,  StMoritz.com, CityOfSalinas.com, and  Norcross.com.

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. Well as a government organization they would have access to a .qc.ca extension, and if that failed the country code .ca.

    I wonder who thought of this process, they are essentially trying to steal the domain, if this doesn’t show how broken the udrp process is, I don’t know what does.

  2. What’s the most shameful about these kinds of UDRPs is that both WIPO and the NAF actually allow these to proceed to UDRP.

    These are supposed to be reviewed for legitimacy by them. Why does it matter if they keep on letting infuriatingly blatant reverse domain name hijacking (RDNH) cases like this one to pass through to UDRP?

    I’d love for WIPO to explain why this UDRP passes the mustard and think it deserves to be heard by panelists?

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Spaceship Doubles its DUM

At the end of July, I wrote about Spaceship surpassing 100,000 domain names under management (DUM). The registrar continues to grow, and its Founder...

You Can Now Hide Estimated Value at Dan

Last week, Dan.com announced and deployed a feature I did not like. On the user control panel, Dan showed GoDaddy's Estimated Value for each...

Media.com Buyer Comments on Acquisition

This afternoon, Axios reported the sale of the Media.com domain name. Kismet Group, an Australian private equity company, acquired the domain name to launch...

“We love to share success!”

If I see two friends or colleagues that could benefit from meeting over a shared interest or converging path, I am always on the...

It Pays to Know Random Phrases

My eyes bulge out of my head sometimes when I see a somewhat obscure term in a domain name coming up for auction. Oftentimes,...