ADR.eu

Language
  • About us
    • Who we are
    • Other domain disputes
    • Contact us
    • News
  • My disputes
    • Login
    • Register new user
  • Help
    • For Complainants
    • For Respondents
    • For Panelists
  • Resources
    • What is UDRP
    • Rules
    • Fees
    • Decisions
    • Panellists
    • Disputed Domain Names
  • Home

This site serves for these domain disputes:

generic Top Level Domains and .co.nl, .co.no and .sx domains

Back to entry page - choose type of domain name dispute

Search

Dispute 100087

  •  
    Complaint
    •  
      Complaint Suspended
    •  
      Dispute Terminated
  •  
    Decision
    •  
      Complaint Accepted
    •  
      Partially Accepted / Rejected
    •  
      Settlement
    •  
      Complaint Rejected
  •  
    Settlement
    •  
      Dispute Terminated

On-line ADR Center of the Czech Arbitration Court (CAC)

Panel Decision

§ 15 of the UDRP Rules (Rules), § 9 of the CAC’s Supplemental Rules (Supplemental Rules)

Case No. 100087
Time of Filing 2009-08-07 12:09:44
Disputed domain name VOULI.NET
Case Administrator
Name Tereza Bartošková
Complainant
Organization THE HELLENIC PARLIAMENT
Respondent
Organization PRESS OFFICE / VASILIOS BETAS
A summary of this Decision is hereby attached in English as an Annex.
Other Legal Proceedings
There is apparently no other legal proceeding.
Factual Background
The complaint has been lodged by the Hellenic Parliament. In the complaint exclusive rights are invoked in the term “Vouli”, the name by which the Hellenic Parliament is known and, furthermore, is identified in the Greek Constitution.

The domain name <vouli.net> was registered on 29 September 2008 and currently hosts a website which, under the words “NEWS AGENCY, HELLAS AND CYPRUS NEWS 1980-2009” and “LIVE RADIO!”, appears to contain news and articles in Greek on current political affairs.
Parties' Contentions
A. Complainant
- The Complainant is the Hellenic Parliament, known as Vouli in the Greek language and likewise referred to as Vouli in all the State Constitutions from the first Temporary Constitution of Epidaurus to the last revised Constitution of 2001. This name is very well known to the people and identifies the parliamentary body resulting from the national elections.

- No other person or entity has the right to use the name Hellenic Parliament, that is, Vouli, without the consent of the representative of the Hellenic Parliament, according to the Hellenic Constitution.

- The Hellenic Parliament has a Press Office and specific departments to deal with any requests for such consent.

- The Respondent, Vasilios Betas, of Greek nationality, resident of Athens, Greece, holds the domain name <vouli.net>. The corresponding website shows news from the Hellenic Parliament, parts of the minutes of the sessions, details of the Prime Minister and the Ministers, details of the Members of the Hellenic Parliament, details of their resumes, etc.

- The disputed domain name is identical to the name of the Hellenic Parliament as used in the Greek language and as given in the Hellenic Constitution. No unauthorized person has the right to use the name Vouli as this name represents the legislative power of the Hellenic Democracy throughout the centuries.

- The holder of the disputed domain name <vouli.net> has that name illegally, in bad faith and without any legitimate interest, in a manner that offends the principles, the personality and the name of the Parliament. The holder has no legal rights, nor has he been granted or assigned any right to have and use the name of the Hellenic Parliament.

- The Respondent has acquired the disputed domain name in bad faith, with the intention to attract for commercial gain Internet users to his website, and has tried to create confusion with the official website of the Hellenic Parliament, as he does not reveal in his own website the name of the holder. The site also includes banners with advertisements, which is demeaning for the Hellenic Parliament. Internet users see parts of the minutes of the parliamentary sessions and the content concerning members of the parliament and mistakenly think that this website is that of the Hellenic Parliament or is related thereto.

From the above it is concluded that the complainant has superior prior rights in Vouli, which is the very well-known name of the Hellenic Parliament.

The Complainant therefore requests that the contested domain name <vouli.net> be transferred to it.
B. Respondent
The Respondent has not replied to the complaint.
Discussion and Findings
For a complaint lodged under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy to succeed, it is necessary that the three requirements laid down in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy be met. Those requirements are:

(a) that the domain name be identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;

(b) that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

(c) that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

A. Domain name identical or confusingly similar to a mark of the Complainant

The Complainant invokes an exclusive right to use the term Vouli in its capacity as the Hellenic Parliament, which is known by that name to the Greek public and appears under that name in the different Greek Constitutions. However, the Complainant does not invoke any registered trademark, consisting of that name, which it might own.

Nor, in the opinion of this Panellist, has the Complainant submitted sufficient documentation to be acknowledged unregistered trademark rights in the term Vouli or secondary meaning, bearing in mind that this is the transliteration of the Greek word for “parliament” and therefore is, in principle, generic. In the fragments of the Greek Constitution submitted by the Complainant in English the word “parliament” is used in the same manner as other concepts commonly encountered in political law, such as “Government”, “President of the Republic” or “Courts”. In the documents submitted in Greek (where the Complainant has not provided a translation) the equivalent of Vouli in Greek characters appears, although there is nothing to lead one to think that it might not be used in the same generic sense in which the word “parliament” is used in the documents in English.

A word such as this, if not linked to a particular country (as it would be, for example, in "Greek Parliament"), may be freely used as a generic term, above all when the word is actually used by more than one country, as would appear to the case here, given that Vouli is likewise used in Cyprus to designate its Parliament. In accordance with paragraph 4.a.i) of the Uniform Policy, the Complainant must show rights in a mark (albeit an unregistered mark) and in this case that has not been done.

It is to be noted that in the official databases of the various trademark offices registered marks with names such as PARLIAMENT or the equivalent thereof in other languages may be found and that the owners thereof are private enterprises unconnected with the parliamentary bodies of the countries to which the languages concerned correspond. Simply by way of example, we may mention CTM registration No. 2456929, UK registration No. 2452927 and US registration No. 3293379.

In short, there is no registered trademark to support the complaint and, in the opinion of this Panellist, the Complainant has not submitted sufficient evidence to be acknowledged a trademark right in the term Vouli which might serve to obviate the meaning thereof.

B. Rights or Legitimate Interests

Although the Complainant has not submitted a translation of the website of the Respondent, which is in Greek, that website indeed appears to contain news and articles on politics and, particularly, current parliamentary business in Greece and Portugal. The domain name <vouli.net> is therefore being used within a context where its adoption proves logical, inasmuch as it makes specific reference to current affairs in Parliament (Vouli). To use a domain name which means “parliament” to host a website relating to parliamentary news would seem well within the bounds of reason. Further, from the content of the website it would appear that the Respondent has been making peaceful use of the domain name for years. This is subsumable under the circumstances demonstrating rights or legitimate interests mentioned in paragraph 4.c.i) of the Uniform Policy.

In the absence of evidence of any exclusive right held by the Complainant, this Panellist is of the opinion that adequate proof or signs of a want of rights or legitimate interests on the part of the Respondent has not been submitted in this case.


C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith

Nor, in the opinion of this Panellist, has the Complainant provided proof or prima facie evidence of bad faith on the part of the Respondent. In principle, none of the circumstances described in this regard in paragraph 4.b of the Uniform Policy would appear to arise in this case.

Indeed, as previously mentioned, the contested domain name is in keeping with the content of the news items and articles to be found at the corresponding website.

Consequently, in the opinion of this Panellist, it has not been shown that the circumstances under which the complaint could be upheld, in accordance with the Uniform Policy, arise in this case. As was observed in the decision on WIPO case No. No. D2000-1470:

"This Panel is not a general domain name court, and the Policy is not designed to adjudicate all disputes of any kind that relate in any way to domain names. Rather, the Policy is narrowly crafted to apply to a particular type of abusive cybersquatting. To invoke the Policy, a Complainant must show that the domain name at issue is identical or confusingly similar to a mark in which the Complainant has rights, that the Respondent lacks rights or a legitimate interest in the domain name, and that the Respondent registered and used the name in bad faith. "

Similarly, in the decision on WIPO case No. D2003-0003 it was noted that:

"The Panel appreciates that the Complainant disapproves of some of the products marketed by the Respondent and finds it uncomfortable that these are being sold through a web site carrying the name "Mystik." It bears emphasis, however, that the ICANN Policy is "a limited tool for acting against certain types of cybersquatting." AST Sportswear, Inc., WIPO Case No. D2001-1324 <../2001/d2001-1324.html>, at page 4. In the present case, the terms of the Policy afford no relief to the Complainant, which must be left to its remedies, if any, under the applicable national laws."


Decision
For the reasons set out above, the Complaint is Rejected
and the disputed domain name(s) is(are) to be
VOULI.NET Complaint rejected
Panellists
Name Mr. Luis H. de Larramendi
Date of Panel Decision 2009-09-24
Annexes
Annex: English summary of the Panel Decision
The complaint has been lodged by The Hellenic Parliament, which is not the owner of any registration of VOULI as a trademark but invokes exclusive rights in that term as it is the name by which the Greek Parliament is known under the Constitution.

The Panellist does not find that the Complainant has evidenced any unregistered trademark right given that the word “vouli” means “parliament” and therefore is, in principle, a generic term. As such it is in fact also used to designate other parliaments. The Complainant has not submitted documentation that might permit the acknowledgment of a trademark right in that term or attest to secondary meaning.

Nor may an absence of rights or legitimate interests or bad faith on the part of the holder of the contested domain name be perceived in this case, as the corresponding website contains news and articles of a political and parliamentary nature and the adoption of that domain name would therefore appear reasonable.

The Panellist therefore dismisses the complaint.

Publication of the Decision
Publish the Decision
Print this form

Copyright © 2008 Czech Arbitration Court | Online Platform: Copyright © 2008 Expert4me a.s. | Contact webmaster | Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy | Contacts