{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102199",
    "time_of_filling": "2018-10-19 09:54:38",
    "domain_names": [
        "boursurama.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "BOURSORAMA "
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Enora Millocheau)",
    "respondent": [
        "Josef  Barguali "
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is a French based online brokerage, financial information on the Internet and online banking company which if founded in 1995 and providing online banking services for over 1.5 million customers in France. It also owns the first national financial and economic information site and online banking portal, www.boursorama.com, which was visited more than 30 million monthly. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant holds several trademark registrations for “BOURSORAMA” and the Complainant also holds domain names including “BOURSORAMA”.\r\n\r\nOn October 15, 2018, the Respondent registered the disputed domain name. When visiting the domain name, a page is opened where it is stated that „Welcome to boursurama.com This Web page is parked for FREE, courtesy of GoDaddy.com.“ which shows that there is no current and commercial use at the disputed domain name.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings that are pending or decided and that relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant is a French based online brokerage, financial information on the Internet and online banking company which if founded in 1995 and providing online banking services for over 1.5 million customers in France. It also owns the first national financial and economic information site and online banking portal, www.boursorama.com, which was visited more than 30 million monthly.  \r\n\r\n1. THE DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME IS ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THE COMPLAINANT’S TRADEMARKS „BOURSORAMA“\r\n\r\nIt is more than obvious that the disputed domain name is almost identical to the Complainant’s trademarks “BOURSORAMA”, as it differs only on the substitution of the sixth letter „O“ by the letter „U“ which is not sufficient to exclude the likelihood of confusion. \r\n\r\nThe term BOURSORAMA is a distinctive term which has no meaning in any language, only known in relation to the Complainant.\r\n\r\nIn particular, it is undeniable that this case represents a clear example of typosquatting, where the disputed domain name is one letter different from the Complainant's mark. For instance, CAC Case No. 101871, ArcelorMittal SA v ABA.\r\n\r\n2. THE RESPONDENT HAS NO RIGHTS OR LEGITIMATE INTERESTS IN RESPECT OF THE DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that the Respondent has no rights on the disputed domain name, the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by BOURSORAMA in any way. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for or has any business with the Respondent. Therefore the Respondent also has not been authorized or licensed by the Complainant to use the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that there is no fair or non-commercial uses of the disputed domain name as well.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, the Complainant alleges that the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name in order to create a likelihood of confusion and to phish the banking information since the website under the disputed domain name contains a dialogue boz which necessitate the user ID and password to be submitted. Accordingly, the Respondent argues that this dialogue box is placed into a website which is confusingly similar with the registered and well-known trademark of the Respondent. \r\n\r\nTherefore, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent has no right or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name. \r\n \r\n3. THE DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME WAS REGISTERED AND IS USED IN BAD FAITH\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. The Complainant alleges that minor changes are not sufficient to vanish the confusing similarity between the disputed domain name and the registered French and EU trademarks. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant also asserts that trademark BOURSORAMA is well-known as is hold by WIPO in Case No. 102017 which is BOURSORAMA S.A. v. Morval Robert and that the Respondent has registered and used the disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant’s trademark BOURSORAMA. Moreover, the Complainant indicates that the Respondent might have the disputed domain name registered for phishing purposes since the website under the disputed domain name contains a dialogue boz which necessitate the user ID and password to be submitted. \r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\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": "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": [
        "Mrs Selma Ünlü"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2018-12-03 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant has submitted evidence, which the Panel accepts, showing that it is the registered owner of the following:\r\n\r\n- the EU trademark BOURSORAMA (Registration n°1758614) dated October 19, 2001;\r\n- the French trademark BOURSORAMA (Registration n°98723359) dated March 13, 1998.\r\n\r\nMoreover, the Complainant is also the owner of a number of domain names bearing the sign „BOURSORAMA“ such as <boursorama.com> dated March 1, 1998. ",
    "decision_domains": {
        "BOURSURAMA.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}