The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Domain Name has been registered and is being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii)of the Policy). The domain name “INTESASANPAOLO.GROUP” was registered and is being used in bad faith.
The Complainant’s trademark “INTESA SANPAOLO” is distinctive and well known all around the world. The fact that the Respondent has registered a domain name that is confusingly similar to it indicates that the Respondent had knowledge of the Complainant’s trademark at the time of registration of the disputed domain name. In addition, if the Respondent had carried even a basic Google search in respect of the wording “INTESA SANPAOLO”, the same would have yielded obvious references to the Complainant.
In addition, the contested domain name is not used for any bone fide offerings. More particularly, there are present circumstances indicating that, by using the domain name, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to his web site, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of his web site (par. 4(b)(iv) of the Policy).
First of all, several services can be detected, but not in good faith: in fact, the domain name is connected to a website sponsoring, among others, banking and financial services, for whom the Complainant’s trademarks are registered and used (see also the Complainant’s official site http://www.intesasanpaolo.com home page). Internet users, while searching for information on the Complainant’s services, are confusingly led to the websites of the Complainant’s competitors, sponsored on the websites connected to the domain name at issue.
Therefore, the Respondent has registered and is using the domain name at issue in order to intentionally divert traffic away from the Complainant’s web site. The Respondent uses the domain for a parking website which offers via Godaddy references to other competitors of the Complainant . This use of the disputed domain name, which allows accessing to the web sites of the Complainant’s competitors, also through the Complainant’s trademark, causes, as well, great damages to the latter, due to the misleading of their present clients and to the loss of potential new ones (see WIPO Decisions n. D2000-1500, Microsoft Corporation v. StepWeb, and D2001-1335, The Vanguard Group, Inc v. Venta).
In the light of the above, the third and final element necessary for finding that the Respondent has engaged in abusive domain name registration and use has been established.
|