PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:
COMPLAINANT:
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Trademark as the disputed domain name includes in its entirety the Trademark and as the addition of the generic term “AGGIORNAMENTI” (meaning “updates”) is not sufficient to avoid such confusing similarity.
The Complainant also states that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest with regard to the disputed domain name. The Complainant argues that the Respondent has nothing to do with the Complainant, that the Respondent's use of the disputed domain name has not been authorized or licensed by the Complainant, that the disputed domain name does not correspond to the name of the Respondent, that the Respondent is not commonly known as “AGGIORNAMENTI-INTESASANPAOLO”, and that the Respondent is not making a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the disputed domain name.
With regard to bad faith, the Complainant states that the Trademark is distinctive and well-known all around the world and that the Respondent had knowledge of the Complainant’s trademarks at the time of registration of the disputed domain name and therefore registered the disputed domain name in bad faith. With regard to bad faith use, the Complainant argues that the Respondent uses the disputed domain name in connection with a phishing website and thereby has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to his website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of his website. In addition, the Complainant provided evidence that the Respondent's website also reproduces the Complainant’s logo and website layout.
RESPONDENT:
No administratively compliant Response has been filed.
|