{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-101925", "time_of_filling": "2018-03-20 09:44:07", "domain_names": [ "ijcdecaux.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "JCDECAUX SA" ], "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Enora MILLOCHEAU)", "respondent": [ "Lance Homstol" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "The following facts are asserted by the Complainant and not contested by the Respondent. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant, JCDecaux SA, is well-known worldwide in outdoor advertising being present in three principal segments: street furniture, transport advertising and billboard. The Complainant has more than 49,300 screens across 30 countries in airports, rail and metro stations, shopping malls and on billboards and street furniture. Employing a total of 12,000 people, the Complainant is present in more than 60 countries and 3,700 cities and in 2013 generated revenues of €2,676m.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant owns several trademarks and a large domain name portfolio, all of them characterized by the presence of the distinctive wording “JCDECAUX“.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was registered on 7 March 2018 and is inactive since its registration. ", "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.", "no_response_filed": "The Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademarks since it contains the whole JCDECAUX Trademark prefixed by the letter “i“ and, thus, this represents a clear case of typosquatting.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the Respondent is not known as “IJCDECAUX” and has not acquired trademark mark rights in such term.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant also states that the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant and is not related in any way to its business. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent.\r\n\r\nNeither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademarks or to apply for registration of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name is inactive and, therefore, the Complainant contends that the Respondent is not making any use of the disputed domain name and has registered it with the sole aim to take advantage of the good reputation the Complainant had built up in its trademarks and in order to create a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's trademarks and domain names.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has requested the cancellation of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nNo administratively compliant Response has been filed.", "rights": "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).", "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 disputed 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 disputed 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": "PRIVACY OR PROXY REGISTRATION\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name has been registered with privacy or proxy registration service. Accordingly, the Complainant named the proxy service as Respondent in its Complaint. Upon CAC's Request for Registrar Verification, the registrar of the disputed domain name provided the underlying registrant information. Then CAC requested the Complainant to correct the identification of the Respondent, disclosing the underlying registrant information received from the registrar to the Complainant. The Complainant amended its Complaint to reflect the disclosed underlying registrant information within the time frame fixed by CAC.\r\n\r\nThe 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. Ivett Paulovics" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2018-04-13 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "TRADEMARKS\r\n\r\n- US TM (word) JCDecaux no. 2359171, filed on 21 December 1998, registered on 20 June 2000, duly renewed, in class (Nice Classification) 19\r\n\r\n- International TM (word) JCDecaux no. 803987, registered on 27 November 2001, duly renewed, in classes (Nice Classification) 6, 9, 11, 19, 20, 35, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, with designation of Bahrein, Estonia, Republic of Korea, Lithuania, Mexico, Norway, Turkey, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Switzerland, China, Czech Republic, Algeria, Egypt, Croatia, Hungary, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Kazakhastan, Morocco, Monaco, Montenegro, The former Yogoslav Republic of Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Russian Federation, Slovenia, Slovakia, Ukraine and Vietnam\r\n\r\n- EUTM (word) JCDecaux no. 004961454, filed on 8 March 2006, registered on 12 April 2007, duly renewed, in classes 6, 9, 12, 39 \r\n\r\nDOMAIN NAMES\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is owner of a large domain name portfolio, comprising in particular the domain name registered on 23 June 1997 and used as its main website.\r\n\r\nCOMPANY NAME\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has been carrying on business under the company name JCDecaux SA (joint stock company under French law) named after its founder Jean-Claude Decaux. \r\n\r\nThe above-mentioned rights are hereinafter referred to as the JCDECAUX Trademark. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant has proved its rights in the JCDECAUX Trademark for the purposes of the Policy.", "decision_domains": { "IJCDECAUX.COM": "" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }