IT.COM

legal Dutch company's flawed UDRP filed against the domain McCoy.com

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch
Impact
5,736
A Dutch company that filed a UDRP to usurp the domain name McCoy(.com) claimed that the registrant's failure to respond to inquiries to buy the domain constitutes "bad faith."

They lost the case as the argument holds no water. More info.
 
8
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
Pretty dumb dispute. There should be penalties for this type of abuse of the system.
  • There are 132,524 people in the U.S. with the last name Mccoy.
  • Statistically the 258th most popular last name.
That is just in the US. It is probably popular surname in any English speaking country.

Also, it is used in terms like "the real mccoy".

There is no way anyone could reasonably believe they have exclusive rights to this term.

There really should be an initial bar you have to pass before this type of abusive UDRP even makes it to a panel, something similar to anti-SLAPP laws in real courts.

Brad
 
9
•••
Pretty dumb dispute.

Now, they know enough & as soon as a domain is sold / transferred (whois - change of holder), 2nd UDRP or court. !?

Regards
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Now, they know enough & as soon as a domain is sold / transferred (whois - change of holder), 2nd UDRP or court. !?

Regards
Even if they did they'd have the same issue. They weren't able to prove that the domain was registered in bad faith. Without that they don't have a case in udrp or the court for that matter. They'd have to come up with more than they did, which was "bad faith cause they won't talk to me 😭 waaaa".

Adding to what @bmugford said, there's a famous crisps (aka potato chip) brand called McCoy's in the UK, so that alone indicates more than one use of the name in the global marketplace.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
Some times, Complainants gamble by providing a) partial facts b) alleging particular damages took place. The gamble might pay off if the Respondent does not respond (as in this case.) However, panelists are trained to address the core issues vs. just the lack of a response. In this case, the real McCoy won. :)
 
2
•••
Some times, Complainants gamble by providing a) partial facts b) alleging particular damages took place. The gamble might pay off if the Respondent does not respond (as in this case.) However, panelists are trained to address the core issues vs. just the lack of a response. In this case, the real McCoy won. :)
Yep. UDRP is just the first step isn't it, I don't think it would have stood up in court without some solid evidence that they targeted them with their registration.
 
0
•••
Back