The Panel finds that the disputed domain name “dafa44.com” is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. Adding two generic numbers "44" to the trademark "DAFA" does not render the domain name in question unsimilar.
The Complainant contends that the Respondent has made no use of, or demonstrable preparations to use the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services, nor is making a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the disputed domain name, and is not commonly known under the disputed domain name.
The Panel notes that the disputed domain name holder’s name or contact details contain no reference to DAFA or DAFABET. In lack of any Response from the Respondent, or any other information indicating the contrary, the Panel concludes that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of “dafa44.com”.
The Complainant also proved that the Respondent has engaged in a pattern of conduct regarding bad faith domain name registration and use of the disputed domain name. The Respondent is adapting the design of the Complainant's website in a way that the public may think the parties are affiliated. The domain name is used for an active web site, which shows a similar design as the Complainant's website and uses the trademark "dafa" in the word "dafa999" and offers identical services (online betting). Further, it uses a logo (yellow "D" in yellow circle), which is obviously the logo of the Complainant.
These facts, including the absence of a Response and pattern of conduct on the part of the Respondent also confirm that the disputed domain name has not only been registered in order to prevent the trademark holder - the Complainant - from reflecting the DAFA44 name in a corresponding domain name under .com, but is also used in bad faith.
|