Recent Posts
- Petition launched to fight .org deal
- ICANN board meets to consider PIR acquisition TODAY
- XYZ buys dormant gTLD from “pyramid scheme” operator
- I attempt to answer ICA’s questions about the “terrible blunder” .org acquisition
- Selling off PIR, did ISOC just throw .org registrants under a bus?
- Rival dot-brand bidders in settlement talks, seek auction delay
- ICANN going back to Puerto Rico for a third time
- Montreal airport thinks DI is porn
- DI Leaders Roundtable #2 — Should we kill off “Whois”?
- Former NTIA chief Redl now working for Amazon
- Neustar’s .co contract up for grabs
- US official Heineman joins GoDaddy
- Web.com got pwned
- Surprise! ICANN throws out complaints about .org price caps
- Somber mood as ICANN 66 opens in Montreal
- America has Amazon’s back in gTLD fight at ICANN 66
- New (kinda) geo-TLD rules laid out at ICANN 66
- Emoji domains get a 😟 after broad study
- Industry veteran Jay Daley tapped to lead IETF
- Verisign likely to get its billion-dollar .com pricing windfall
- ICANN enters talks to kill off Whois for good
- Form an orderly queue: New Zealand wants a new back-end
- Brexit hell: .eu suspension plan put on hold
- DI Leaders Roundtable #1 — How many new gTLDs will be applied for next time around?
- Now you don’t have to live in the EU to register a .eu domain, but there’s a catch
- Spam is not our problem, major domain firms say ahead of ICANN 66
- Crunch time, again, for Whois access policy
- Google quietly launches .new domains sunrise
- After .org price outrage, ICANN says it has NOT scrapped public comments
- Hindu god smites Chrysler gTLD
- Top ICANN advisor Tarek Kamel dies at 57
- Three big changes could be coming to .uk
- Introducing… the DI Leaders Roundtable
- After killing the cows, what does the new Tucows logo remind you of?
- Radix acquires another gTLD
- .whoswho survives!
- Correction: the 10 most-used dot-brands
- Nominet raises .uk prices
- Registrar suspended over dodgy transfers
- Mediocre .vote gTLD drops restrictions
- ICANN’s babysitting fund goes live
- Claims auDA boss quit after he was busted for “falsified” law degree
- .bond domains could cost a grand each
- PIR’s “new” .org domain is just temporary. Help it pick another new one!
- MMX switches porn TLDs from Afilias to Uniregistry
- Argentina will use a lottery to decide 2LD landrush
- Sixty gTLD registries not monitoring security threats
- ICANN must do more to fight internet security threats [Guest Post]
- Bumper batch of dot-brands off themselves for Friday 13th
- .org price cap complaints more like “spam” says Ombudsman
Yes, .co domains are subject to the UDRP
I’ve been getting a fair bit of search traffic over the last few days from people evidently wondering whether .co domain names are subject to the same UDRP rules as .com, so I thought I’d answer the question directly.
Yes, they are.
For avoidance of doubt, I’ve just talked to .CO Internet’s director of marketing, Lori Anne Wardi, who had just talked to the registry’s policy people.
She told me that .co domains are subject to the exact same ICANN UDRP as .com.
If you’re a .co registrant, you’re bound to the policy the same as you are in .com. If you’re a trademark holder, you file a complaint in the same way.
The only difference at the moment is that .CO Internet has contracted with only one UDRP provider, WIPO, but Wardi said that more providers may be signed up in future.
[…] letter points out, as I have previously, that .co is subject to the UDRP on the same terms as other TLDs including .com. The outcome of a […]