In April, I noticed that a UDRP had been filed against the MSC.com domain name. Several months prior to the UDRP filing, the domain name had been acquired for â‚¬35,000 via Sedo (nearly $50,000 USD). This afternoon, the UDRP decision was reported by WIPO, and the complaint was denied.
The complainant in this case was MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company Holding S.A., a very large global shipping company. The respondent line in the UDRP decision is interesting as it is listed Sedo as one respondent. Later on in the decision, it seems to clarify that Sedo was still listed as the registrant behind privacy, although the domain name was owned by another party, as it had sold but had not yet transferred. Both Sedo and the owner of the domain name responded to the complaint.
I think the UDRP decision was the correct one, and it is good to see that a one-panelist UDRP decision made the correct decision. The respondent sought a finding of reverse domain name hijacking, but that was denied. I am a bit surprised the responding party / parties did not seek a three person UDRP panel, but I am glad the right decision was made.
It’s unfortunate that a domain buyer had to defend a great domain name like this, but it is one of the risks of this business.