1. The Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Name <ce-g3-enlignecredit-agricole.info> is confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademarks. Many panels have found that a disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a complainant’s trademark where the disputed domain name incorporates the complainant’s trademark in its entirety. Also in this case the Complainant’s registered trademark “CREDIT AGRICOLE” is fully included in the Disputed Domain Name.
Furthermore, it is the view of this Panel that the addition of the further elements “CE”, “G3”, and “ENLIGNE” (which means “ONLINE” in English) do not add distinctive matter so as to distinguish it from Complainant’s trademark.
2. In the absence of any Response, or any other information from the Respondent indicating the contrary, the Panel further holds that the Complainant successfully presented its prima facie case and that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name <ce-g3-enlignecredit-agricole.info>.
In particular, the 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. In addition, the Respondent is not commonly known by the Disputed Domain Name.
Finally, the website to which the Disputed Domain Name resolves is an inactive webpage. This can neither be considered as bona fide offering of goods or services nor a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the Disputed Domain Name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue. In fact, there is no use at all.
3. Finally, the Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Name has also been registered and is being used in bad faith.
It is the view of this Panel that the Respondent has intentionally registered the Disputed Domain Name, which fully includes the Complainant’s trademark “CREDIT AGRICOLE”. In addition, the Panel notes that Complainant’s trademark “CREDIT AGRICOLE” is deemed well-known. Therefore, it is the view of this Panel that the Respondent, who is resident in France, knew or should have known that the Disputed Domain Name is highly similar to Complainant’s trademark when he registered the disputed domain name. Registration of a domain name in awareness of a reputed trademark and in the absence of rights or legitimate interests amounts to registration in bad faith.
|