PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:
COMPLAINANT:
The Complainant states that the disputed domain name <arcelormittaluk.com> is confusingly similar to its international trademark ARCELORMITTAL. The trademark is incorporated in its entirety in the disputed domain name.
The addition of the geographical generic abbreviation "UK" (for United Kingdom) is not sufficient to escape the finding that the domain name <arcelormittaluk.com> is confusingly similar to the trademark ARCELORMITTAL.
On the contrary, the addition of a geographic term renders the disputed domain name even more confusingly similar to the registered trademark because it causes an immediate association with the sales office of Complainant in the geographic area in question.
Furthermore, the Complainant contends the addition of the gTLD “.COM” does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the international trademark ARCELORMITTAL of the Complainant. It does not prevent the likelihood if confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant, its trademark and its domain names associated.
Finally, the wording “ARCELORMITTAL” is only known in relation with the Complainant. It has no meaning whatsoever in English or in any other language.
The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name <arcelormittaluk.com>. He is not related in any way with the Complainant.
The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. Neither licence nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the trademark ARCELORMITTAL, or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant.
The website in relation with the disputed domain name <arcelormittaluk.com> has been inactive since its registration.
However, on January 4, 2016, a fraudulent email was sent from the address trastgeldi@harran.edu.tr to a potential job seeker. The sender pretends to be a Mr Andrew Morris - HR Executive from the company ArcelorMittal Group. Since the sender is obviously not from the ArcelorMittal Group, this constitutes a case of identity theft. The Respondent could not pretend to have any legitimate right on the disputed domain name <arcelormittaluk.com>.
Moreover, in his email, he invited the recipient to send his CV/Resume to the email address: career@arcelormittaluk.com. Thus, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain name <arcelormittaluk.com> has been registered with the sole aim to create the fraudulent email address career@arcelormittaluk.com in order to attract potential job seekers.
The disputed domain name has been registered with Whois privacy services, which is another proof of the lack of legitimate interest of the Respondent.
Given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademark and reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the trademark ARCELORMITTAL.
The fact that the sender of the fraudulent email pretended to be a Mr Andrew Morris - HR Executive from the company ArcelorMittal Group confirms that the sender had knowledge of the Complainant’s when he registered the disputed domain name.
Moreover, in his email, he invited the recipient to send his CV/Resume to the email address: career@arcelormittaluk.com. Thus, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain name <arcelormittaluk.com> has been registered with the sole aim to create the fraudulent email address career@arcelormittaluk.com in order to attract potential job seekers and to impersonate the Complainant.
It is a clear case of scamming. Thereby, the Complainant believes that the use of the domain name <arcelormittaluk.com> for “scamming” activities is another indication of bad faith, since such practice could seriously harm Complainant’s interests.
Finally, the website in relation with the disputed domain name has been inactive since its registration. As prior panels have held, the incorporation of a famous mark into a domain name, coupled with an inactive website, may be evidence of bad faith registration and use.
On these grounds, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name <arcelormittaluk.com> in bad faith.
NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.
|