Respondent says he met actor in 1999 – 28 years after the actor’s death.
When I first saw the domain name Texican.com was in dispute, I thought the domain owner would win. After all, there are plenty of companies and entities that use the name “Texican”, so why should one complainant get the domain unless it was clearly targeted (not that that hasn’t happened before). It’s also a generic slang term.
But in this case the respondent would have been better off not responding to the complaint because he made a crucial mistake that led the arbitrator to think he fabricated evidence. He said that he met the actor of the movie “The Texican” in 1999 and wanted to create a site dedicated to him. There’s just one problem: that actor died in 1971.
The panelist wrote:
This story appears to be fabricated because, as noted in the links about Audie Murphy that Respondent added to his site after the filing of the Complaint, the actor Audie Murphy died in a plane crash in 1971, twenty-eight years prior to when Respondent claims to have met him. Respondent’s claims thus lack credibility.
On the issue of registration in bad faith, the panelist noted that it was conceivable that the domain wasn’t registered with the complainant Texican Natural Gas Company in mind, but the respondent’s credibility was in question:
Respondent states that he had not heard of Complainant at the time that he registered the Domain Names in 1999, which might support an argument that Respondent did not register the Domain Names in bad faith (at least as to Complainant). However, given Respondent’s fabricated statement about meeting Audie Murphy in 1999, the Panel is concerned about the credibility of Respondent’s other assertions.
Ramiro Canales says
The Complainant had a weak case, but Respondent’s fabrication was the nail in the coffin. Common law trademarks are difficult to prove and extensive evidence is required. Additionally, contrary to the panelist’s conclusion, there is no duty to do a trademark search. Several UDRP cases have held that, including mine. The Respondent should hire an attorney to file a preliminary injunction to prevent the transfer.
Tim says
Could there have been a remake of the movie and he met a different actor in the new “Texican” and did not know there was an old one? Just a thought.
Jonty Williams says
I thought everybody fabricated their UDRP responses. Or, is it just me?
I find that if you throw enough bologna at the wall some will stick.
visitor says
Jonty, that says more about you than the honesty of the respondents.
Jonty Williams says
“Jonty, that says more about you than the honesty of the respondents.”
In case you haven’t noticed half the complaints these days are fabricated. You have to fight fire with fire.
Steve M says
Au contraire.
Once one knows the secret of moving between this world and the next, such “after death” meetings are in fact no problem at all.
John Berryhill says
“Once one knows the secret of moving between this world and the next, such “after death” meetings are in fact no problem at all.”
That’s what I was thinking.
I saw Elvis in Las Vegas just two years ago.
Acro says
“Are you a texi*can* or a texi*can’t*?” 🙂