FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:
1. As the language of the registration agreement is Vietnamese, the Complainant filed a request that the language of the proceeding should be English based on the fact that (a) the Respondent has not replied to the Complainant's cease and desist letter and reminders, and more particularly has not responded that he did not understand the content of the letter, (b) the Respondent has chosen to register the disputed domain name under the Top Level domain ("TLD") “.com” which is the commercial TLD, and is applicable to a broader audience than merely Turkey and (c) translation of the Complaint would cause unnecessary delay and the Complainant would be unfairly disadvantaged by being forced to translate, as the translation would raise high costs.
2. The Complainant manufactures kitchen appliances and was established in 1911 in Switzerland, expanded globally in the 80-ies of the last century, and has a wholly owned subsidiary in Turkey. Presently, the Complainant has 70 subsidiaries with around 9,000 employees in 37 countries, generating consolidated sales of CHF 2.1 billion.
3. The Respondent registered the disputed domain name on February 16, 2017 which resolves to a website which apparently offers products under the FRAKE Trademark.
4. The disputed domain name incorporates the FRANKE Trademark coupled with the word Istanbul plus the Turkish word “servis”, which additional terms closely connected to the Complainant's business. According to the Complainant these references exaggerate the impression that Respondent is somehow affiliated with the Complainant, and the Respondent is somehow doing business in Turkey using the FRANKE Trademark.
5. The Complainant has not found that Respondent is commonly known by the disputed domain name. The Complainant further alleges that the Respondent has not by virtue of the content of the website under the disputed domain name, nor by its use of the disputed domain name shown that they will be used in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services. According to the Complainant the is further no evidence that the Respondent has a history of using, or preparing to use, the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services. The FRANKE logotype in red appears prominently on the top left of the website and strongly suggests that there is a connection with Complainant. Moreover, the use of the FRANKE Trademark (i) in the disputed domain name and (ii) also on multiple occasions in the website text further creates the impression that there is some official or authorized link with Complainant in relation to repairs and services within Turkey, especially in the Istanbul area. The Complainant claims that the Respondent does not meet the criteria of Oki Data Americas, Inc. v. ASD, Inc. WIPO Case No. D2001–0903,concerning the use of a trademark as a domain name by an authorized or non-authorized third party.
6.The Complainant further claim that the FRANKE Trademark predate the registration of the disputed domain name and the Respondent has never been authorized by the Complainant to register the disputed domain name. In light of its the website content, it is clear to the Complainant that the Respondent was aware of the FRANKE Trademark at the time of registration and, therefore, the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith.
7. When the Complainant discovered the existence of the disputed domain name and the website to which it resolves it sent the Respondent a cease and desist letter and two subsequent reminders, which the Respondent all ignored. The Respondent has also never been granted permission to register the disputed domain name and the Respondent takes advantage of the FRANKE Trademark by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent’s products, services, website or location, for which reason the Complainant alleges that the Respondent uses the disputed domain name in bad faith.
|