Decision for dispute CAC-UDRP-108342

The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the Disputed Domain Name.

The Complainant registered numerous trade marks worldwide, including but not limited to:

RUNE (word) – UK00911161239 (UK), registered 9 October 2013;

RUNE (word) – EUIPO 011161239 (EU), registered 9 October 2013;

RUNE (word) – EUIPO 018622946 (EU), registered 20 May 2022.

These registrations cover, inter alia, online games, entertainment services, digital content, and related merchandise. 

The Complainant also owns the domain name <runescape.com>, which has resolved to an active website relating to online video games since 17 August 2000. In addition to <runescape.com>, the Complainant has acquired various further domain names which incorporate the RUNE and RUNESCAPE trade marks and which resolve to active websites.   

The Complainant is a globally recognised video game developer and publisher, best known for its RuneScape and Old School RuneScape games. Since at least 2010, the Complainant has operated and promoted its games and associated brands worldwide, including through its independent fan and community event RuneFest, which has been held nine times to date and most recently for its tenth edition in March 2025, selling approximately 1,500 tickets.

The Disputed Domain Name was registered on 1 April 2025, long after the Complainant had established extensive registered and unregistered rights in its RUNE, RUNESCAPE, and RUNE-formative trade marks.

The Complainant is also active on social media and has generated a significant level of endorsement.

Complainant states that it has also received public and critical praise for its Games. Old School RuneScape was awarded 2019 EE Mobile Game of the Year at the British Academy Games Awards, while maintaining a Metacritic score of 87, a 4.8 rating (out of 5) on the iOS App Store, and 14,252 “Very Positive” user ratings on Steam.

The Complainant submits that the registration and use of the Disputed Domain Name is abusive under the UDRP Policy.

The Complainant states that the Disputed Domain Name includes the Complainant’s RUNE Trade Mark as the dominant element, along with the non-distinctive term ‘NUGGET’. The inclusion of the term ‘NUGGET’ should in the view of Complainant not prevent a finding of confusing similarity.

The combination of ‘RUNE’ and ‘NUGGET’ does in the view of Complainant nothing to alter the impression generated by the Disputed Domain Name in the eyes of the average Internet user. The Respondent has adopted the same naming structure for the Disputed Domain Name as is used in the Complainant’s RUNE-formative Trade Marks, such as RUNECOIN, RUNEMETRICS, RUNEFEST, and RUNEWIZARDS, as well as its use of RUNE-formative terms more broadly. As such, a user would associate the two terms ‘RUNE’ and ‘NUGGET’ combined to indicate the domain originates from the Complainant. 

Furthermore, the Complainant states that the Respondent has copied content from and relating to the Complainant’s Game onto the website available at the domain name. 

In addition to the substantial following and recognition of the Complainant’s brand, the Complainant submits that the content on the Disputed Domain Name is also a contributing factor to support the brands’ reputation. 

 In the view of the Complainant the logo and content visible on the website use the Complainant’s copyright-protected content in order to impersonate the Complainant, which evinces wilful targeting on behalf of the Respondent. The Complainant states that this is sufficient to establish the Respondent targeted the Complainant when registering the Disputed Domain Name.

The Complainant submits that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name.

The Complainant submits that the Respondent is using the Disputed Domain Name to resolve to https://www.runenugget.com/ (the “Website”) which offers a pirated version of the Complainant’s Old School RuneScape game. The creation and use of the pirated version of the game, constitutes a violation of the Complainant’s EULA and applicable copyright laws. The Complainant submits that the Respondent’s use of the Disputed Domain Name for what amounts to mere piracy cannot be a bona fide offering of goods or services, due to the illegal activity.

Furthermore, the Complainant states that the Respondent’s offering of a pirated version of the game unfairly competes with the Complainant’s Games, specifically in relation to online video games and entertainment services protected by the Trade Marks. The Complainant submits that the Respondent has chosen to use the RUNE brand and the RUNE-formative naming structure to create the Disputed Domain Name, in order to take advantage of the goodwill generated by the Complainant’s well-established and successful online video game business, without the Respondent having to incur its own advertising or branding expenditure. This cannot constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services.

The Complainant submits that the Disputed Domain Name has been registered and are being used in bad faith in accordance with Policy, Paragraph 4(a)(iii).

The Complainant reiterates the submissions made above that the Trade Marks significantly pre-date the registration of the Disputed Domain Name and the Complainant enjoy a substantial reputation in the RUNE brand and associated RUNE-formative brands. Furthermore, it is clear that the Respondent was unequivocally aware of the RUNE, RUNESCAPE and RUNE-formative brands, given the Respondent’s deliberate impersonation of the Complainant’s RUNE brand, the RUNE-formative naming structure and the Complainant’s RuneScape and Old School RuneScape in-game assets and mechanics.

The Complainant submits that the Respondent is free riding on the success of the RUNE and/or RUNESCAPE brand including by use of the Complainant’s well-known in-game assets and promotional material, including but not limited to the following:

• The Website is promoting a pirated copy of the Old School RuneScape game made available for download at https://runenugget.com/play, the game is a direct copy of Old School RuneScape;
• Use of in-game icons, including the images shown on https://runenugget.com/highscores/skills/, (these icons are taken from Old School RuneScape https://secure.runescape.com/m=hiscore_oldschool/overall); and
• Use of in-game icons, including the images shown on https://runenugget.com/vote. 

The Complainant submits that the only plausible explanation is the Respondent’s service impersonates the Complainant’s Games or otherwise intentionally uses the Complainant’s copyright-protected works and adopts confusingly similar names and assets, with a view to diverting traffic from the Complainant’s websites in order to promote a pirated copy of the Old School RuneScape game. The Complainant submits that the Disputed Domain Name was registered with prior knowledge of the Complainant and their RUNE and RUNE-formative brands as evidenced by the substantial similarity of in-game assets, naming conventions, and art style, with a view to taking advantage of the attractive power of those brands to consumers of online video games.

The Complainant further submits that the Respondent disrupts the Complainant’s business by diverting potential customers to the Website which offer similar and competing goods and services. Using a confusingly similar domain name in a manner disruptive of a Complainant’s business by trading upon the goodwill of a Complainant for the commercial gain evinces bad faith under paragraph 4(b)(iii) and (v) of the Policy.  

In view of the distinctive nature of the RUNE brand, the colossal scope of the Complainant’s business, and the substantial evidence of the Respondent copying/impersonating the Complainant, the Complainant submits that the Respondent’s actual knowledge of the RUNE brand at the time of registration of the Disputed Domain Name is unequivocal, and there is no plausible reason why the Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Name in question other than to target the Complainant and its RUNE Trade Marks.

Based on the submissions above, the Complainant maintains that the Disputed Domain Name was registered and used in bad faith. 

The Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the Disputed Domain Name should be transferred to it.

No administratively compliant Response has been filed.

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy).

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Disputed Domain Name has been registered and is being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).

The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.

Identical or Confusingly Similar (Policy 4(a)(i))

The Disputed Domain Name incorporates the registered trade mark RUNE of Complainant in its entirety as the dominant and distinctive element. The addition of the non-distinctive term “NUGGET” does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity.

Consistent with established UDRP jurisprudence, the generic Top-Level Domain “.com” is irrelevant for the purpose of assessing confusing similarity.

Accordingly, the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to trade marks in which the Complainant has rights.

No Rights or Legitimate Interests (Policy 4(a)(ii))

The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name.

The Disputed Domain Name resolves to a website that offers a version of the Complainant’s Old School RuneScape game, in breach of the Complainant’s End User License Agreement and copyright law. Panels have consistently held that illegal activity, including piracy and impersonation, can never confer rights or legitimate interests under the Policy.

The Respondent:

is not authorised or licensed by the Complainant in any capacity;

is not commonly known by the Disputed Domain Name; and

is not making a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the domain.

Instead, the Respondent uses the Disputed Domain Name to impersonate the Complainant, reproduce copyrighted in-game assets, and commercially exploit the Complainant’s goodwill. Such use cannot constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services.

Registered and Used in Bad Faith (Policy 4(a)(iii))

The Disputed Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith.

At the time of registration, the Respondent had actual knowledge of the Complainant’s RUNE and RUNESCAPE brands, as demonstrated by:

the deliberate adoption of the Complainant’s RUNE-formative naming structure;

the reproduction of copyrighted in-game assets, icons, and mechanics; and

the operation of a competing, pirated version of the Complainant’s game.

The Respondent’s conduct constitutes an intentional attempt to:

attract Internet users for commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion as to source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement (Policy 4(b)(iv)); and

disrupt the Complainant’s business by diverting users to an unauthorised competing service (Policy 4(b)(iii)).

There is no plausible explanation for the registration and use of the Disputed Domain Name other than to exploit the Complainant’s trade mark rights and reputation.

Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith under paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy.