{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-100856",
    "time_of_filling": "2014-09-18 15:54:52",
    "domain_names": [
        "code-promo-rueducommerce.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Lada Válková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "RueDuCommerce"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "CHAIN AVOCATS",
    "respondent": [
        "FUNDATION PRIVATE WHOIS"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant, RueDuCommerce, is a French Company regularly registered in France since the year 1999.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of a portfolio of trademarks consisting of or including the wording \"RUE DU COMMERCE\". The above mentioned trademarks are used in order to distinguish the business of RueDuCommerce consisting of internet-selling activities carried out through its web sites connected to its domain names <rueducommerce.com>  and <rueducommerce.fr>.\r\n\r\nRueDuCommerce has gained an important notoriety among the French net surfers and consumers and at present time it is a major e-merchant in France whose honorability and reliability are well known from the Internet users.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <code-promo-rueducommerce.com> registered by Respondent is confusingly similar to \"RUE DU COMMERCE\" trademark in which the Complainant has rights since said domain name fully incorporates the Complainant's trademark, with the mere addition of the generic prefix “code-promo”.\r\n\r\nThe addition of the prefix “code-promo” is a way to attract customers and take advantage of the notoriety of the mark \"RUE DU COMMERCE\".  Actually Internet users will believe that the domain name “code-promo-rueducommerce.com” is linked to or authorized by RueDuCommerce. \r\n\r\nMoreover, according to the Complainant's statement, the domain name in dispute for a certain period redirected automatically to the website of RueDuCommerce (even if no evidences of such a use have been submitted) in order to create visits and take advantage from it. Currently the domain name in dispute is linked to an inactive web site.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has never licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use his brand or to apply for domain name incorporating it. Furthermore, Respondent has no right on the wording RUE DU COMMERCE and it is not known with a name corresponding to the above wording. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant tried to reach the owner of the domain name in dispute both by a recorded delivery and by email.   The recorded delivery (sent twice) was sent back to the Complainant and the email was never answered.\r\n\r\nIt must be noted that the Respondent has registered the litigious domain name on February 19, 2014 and, therefore after  the registration of the trademarks by the Complainant. The Respondent was therefore able, at the time of the domain name registration, to know the Complainant’s trademark and the infringement to intellectual property rights he was committing by registering this domain name.\r\n\r\nAccording to Respondent's view, it cannot be disputed that the Complainant has well-recognized rights and goodwill in its \"RUE DE COMMERCE\" mark in connection with Internet selling. The <code-promo-rueducommerce.com> domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s \"RUE DE COMMERCE\" mark. The Respondent has no legitimate rights in the <code-promo-rueducommerce.com> domain name. \r\n\r\nFinally, at present time the domain name in dispute results inactive.  According to UDRP rules the circumstance that the domain name is inactive (\"passive holding\") may be considered as a clear evidence of bad faith.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.\r\n",
    "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the 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).",
    "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii)of the Policy).",
    "bad_faith": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Domain Name has been registered and is being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii)of the Policy).",
    "procedural_factors": "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.",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Avv. Guido Maffei"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2014-10-28 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner of different trademark registrations for \"RUE DE COMMERCE\". In particular RueDuCommerce owns:\r\n\r\nFrench Registration for \"RUE DU COMMERCE\" no. 3036950 registered on June 27, 2000 and duly renewed for classes 09, 16, 28, 35, 38, 41 and 42;\r\n\r\nCTM Registration for \"RUE DU COMMERCE\" no. 8299356 registered on February 23, 2011 for classes 09, 16, 35, 36, 37, 38, 41 and 42;\r\n\r\nInternational Registration for  \"RUE DU COMMERCE\" no. 754897 registered on November 15, 2000 and duly renewed for classes 09, 16, 28, 35, 38, 41 and 42;\r\n",
    "decision_domains": {
        "CODE-PROMO-RUEDUCOMMERCE.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}