FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:
1) The Complainant (Philipp Plein) declares to be a German fashion designer and the founder of the eponymous brand "PHILIPP PLEIN". Furthermore, the Complainant informs that "PHILIPP PLEIN" is universally recognized as a leading brand in the luxury fashion industry and that the same Complainant participates to the most important fashion shows around the world. According to the Complainant assertions the market has applauded the PHILIPP PLEIN’s fashion collections, and the world of PHILIPP PLEIN is enjoying a phenomenal success today with showrooms all over the world. The Complainant declares that PHILIPP PLEIN has a turnover of over one hundred milion Euro.
2) According to Franca Sozzani, historic editor in Chief of Vogue Italia, ”Philipp Plein is unique because he has a joy of life. He does not want to be a fashionista, he makes fashion because he loves women. This is a specific, special attitude because he is one of the few”. The Complainant informs that "PHILIPP PLEIN" has concluded several sponsorship agreements, with among others, AS Roma (one of the most important Italian soccer teams), Mauro Icardi, (one of the most important footballers in the world) and Nico Hulkenberg, the Formula one racer. In the Complainant's view due to its longstanding use, and the huge promotional and advertising investments, the "PHILIPP PLEIN" trademark is certainly well-known.
3) The Complainant contends to be very active in the defense of its IP rights against abusive registration of domain names. Among the numerous UDRP favorable decisions, the Complainant cites CAC No. 101583 (Yuriy Shi/ Philipp Plein PHILIPPPLEINTSHIRT.COM) and No. 101584 (Gueijuan Xu/ philipp plein- CHEAPPHILIPPPLEINSALES.COM), which both recognized the fame of the "PHILPP PLEIN" trademark.
4) The Complainant outlines that the disputed domain name was registered on September 25, 2017, in the name of Mr. Gueijuan Xu and that the disputed domain name is connected to a website offering for sale alleged "PHILIPP PLEIN" goods and displaying the Complainant's verbal and figurative trademarks in clear evidence.
5) The Complainant notes that the "PHILIPP PLEIN" trademark is entirely contained in the disputed domain name and that the addition of generic and descriptive words, such as “outlet” and "cheap”, rather than excluding a similarity with the earlier well-known "PHILIPP PLEIN" trademark, increase the likelihood of confusion, since these words are all related to the fashion field and to the selling of clothing.
6) The Complainant denies that the Respondent is an authorized dealer, agent, distributor, wholesaler or retailer of "PHILIPP PLEIN". The Complainant informs that it has never authorized Gueijuan Xu to include his well-known trademark in the disputed domain name, nor to make any other use of his trademark in any manner whatsoever. The Complainant also confirms that he is not in possession of, nor aware of the existence of, any evidence tending to demonstrate that the Respondent is commonly known by the domain name, as individual, business, or other organization. Moreover, to the best knowledge of the Complainant, Gueijuan Xu does not own "PHILIPP PLEIN" formative trademarks, which would grant rights on the disputed domain name.
7) The Complainant argues that the disputed domain name is being used to offer for sale alleged "PHILIPP PLEIN"’s clothing, footwear and other items and that the Respondent is also using the original images of "PHILIPP PLEIN"’s past and actual advertising campaigns. According to the Complainant's view this circumstance increases the likelihood of confusion for the relevant consumer and constitutes a clear violation of the Complainant’s copyright.
8) The Complainant insists that the Respondent is using the disputed domain name to present its websites as official e-commerce platforms of the Complainant, offering for sale alleged "PHILIPP PLEIN" goods and that, in consideration of the above, the Respondent is taking unfair advantage from the distinctive character and reputation of the Complainant’s trademark and unduly seeking to profit from the Complainant's goodwill for its own financial gain.
9) In the Complainant's view the Respondent could not ignore the existence of the "PHILIPP PLEIN" trademark at the time of the registration of the disputed domain name, not only because "PHILIPP PLEIN" is a very well-known trademark, also in China and Hong Kong, but also in consideration of the websites’ contents, which contain the Complainant’s verbal and figurative trademarks as well as images of the Complainant’s advertising campaigns. The Complainant outlines that the disputed domain name has been registered long after the registration of the Complainant’s trademark, having effects all over the world, including China.
10) The Complainant believes that the "PHILIPP PLEIN" image and reputation are strongly affected by the website corresponding to the disputed domain name since said website is very similar to the official one and is offering for sale possible counterfeit goods. In the Complainant's view it is clear that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used to intentionally attract for commercial gain, Internet users to the Respondent’s website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s official website, also creating the impression that the Respondent’s website is sponsored/affiliated or endorsed by the Complainant.
|