1.
Based on the undisputed multiple trademark registrations cited by the Complainant (listed above) the Panel is satisfied that the Complainant has rights in the trademark REMY MARTIN amongst others for alcoholic beverages, in particular wines and spirits. The Respondent did not challenge these allegations.
2.
The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the REMY MARTIN trademarks, since - according to the Complainant's undisputed allegations - the term "RUOU" means “wine” in Vietnamese language and has, therefore, descriptive connotations within the context at issue. Accordingly, the challenged domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks.
3.
Furthermore, as a result of the Complainants’ undisputed allegations and without any evidence from the Respondent to the contrary, the Panel is satisfied that the Complainant has also proven the second and third element of the UDRP:
Indeed, the Complainant stated that the Respondent has no rights in the trademark REMY MARTIN. In particular, Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way, and he is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business.
Finally, the Panel is satisfied that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name and is using it in bad faith. Accordingly, it is satisfied that the Respondent has registered the challenged domain name for the mere purpose of creating a risk of confusion and diverting the Internet users to its website. Moreover, the fact that the domain name is not being used is to be considered as passive holding. The incorporation of a famous mark into a domain name, coupled with an inactive website, is to be considered as bad faith registration and use.
|