Stop looking at the whois information like noobs. It is a
private registration, and the information you see there is the privacy company.
Result: Domain - Blockchain.com IS currently subscribed to WhoisGuard. If the person doesn't answer their emails, then the only way you might even find out the owner is by using law enforcement in Panama. Suing the domain registrar won't help you either.
http://domainnamewire.com/2011/05/09/namecheap-sued-over-whoisguard/Even if you were to trademark the domain name and pay the $5000+ to file with ICANN, you would likely get tossed under arbitration (possibly with the registrar representing); they only need evidence that you acted in bad faith to obtain the domain and you have no established business.
Actually you should have read a bit more on the case you posted its not the first one(and they lost that one) and namecheap have given up the details of the registered person in multiple cases.
Also wrong on the UDRP, fee for single panelist is $1500 and the registar is not allowed to be involved in it
G. The Role of the Registrar
What is the registrar's role in the administrative proceeding?
Except as decribed below, the registrar does not and will not participate in the administration or conduct of the administrative proceeding. The WIPO Center has prepared a flowchart (word or pdf) illustrating the basic interactions between the WIPO Center and a registrar in the course of a case.
The registrar's role in the administrative proceeding is as follows:
(i) To provide requested information to the WIPO Center, including confirming that the disputed domain name is registered with it, that it is registered by the person or entity identified as the Respondent in the Complaint, providing the Respondent's contact details and, when necessary, the Registration Agreement and associated documents;
(ii) To prevent the transfer to a third party of a domain name registration after an Administrative Proceeding has commenced; and
(iii) To implement the Administrative Panel's decision.
And I assume that the person who owns blockchain.info has enough proof that he has a established business and not acting in bad faith.
