{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102276", "time_of_filling": "2018-12-20 13:52:27", "domain_names": [ "vivendi.club" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "VIVENDI" ], "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Enora Millocheau)", "respondent": [ "Premier Equestre" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nPlease see for instance WIPO Case No. D2018-0674, Caesars License Company, LLC v. Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC \/ XiDong Feng (“The addition of the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.club” does not impact the analysis of whether the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark in this case.”)\r\n\r\nPlease see for instance FORUM Case No. FA 1781783, Skechers U.S.A., Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II v. Chad Moston \/ Elite Media Group (“Here, the WHOIS information of record identifies Respondent as “Chad Moston \/ Elite Media Group.” The Panel therefore finds under Policy4(c)(ii) that Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name under Policy 4(c)(ii).”)\r\n\r\nPlease see FORUM Case No. 1785596, King Ranch IP, LLC v. E Miller (“Additionally, Respondent makes no material demonstrable preparations to use the domain name. The domain name simply links to a parking page. Holding a confusingly similar domain name inactively, as does Respondent, is not indicative of any bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy 4(c)(i), nor of a non-commercial or fair use under Policy 4(c)(iii).”)\r\n\r\nPlease see CAC Case No. 101875, VIVENDI v. Phoenix Global Organization Incorporated (“The Panel is convinced that the Trademarks [VIVENDI] are highly distinctive and well-established.”)\r\n\r\nPlease see FORUM Case No. FA 1786533, Guess IP Holder L.P. and Guess, Inc. v. xi long chen (“As noted previously, Complainant offers screenshots of the resolving webpage for the disputed domain name. The Panel finds that Respondent’s inactive use of the disputed domain name indicates bad faith registration and use per Policy 4(a)(iii).“)\r\n", "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings, pending or decided, relating to the disputed domain name.", "no_response_filed": "Complainant contends that the disputed domain name should be transferred because each of the three elements required in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy has been established.\r\n\r\nFirstly, Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its registered trademarks. \r\n\r\nSecondly, Complainant claims that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, and that it does not know Respondent. Complainant asserts that Respondent does not carry out any activity on behalf of Complainant, nor does it have any business association with Respondent. Complainant further claims that no license or authorization has been granted to Respondent to make any use of Complainant’s trademarks VIVENDI, or to apply for registration of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name is identical to its distinctive trademarks VIVENDI known worldwide. Furthermore, Complainant refers to a CAC decision which acknowledged Complainant’s rights in the sign “VIVENDI” (see CAC Case No.101875, VIVENDI v. Phoenix Global Organization Incorporated). \r\n\r\nFinally, Complainant provides a screenshot of the disputed domain name dated December 17, 2018 which shows that the disputed domain name redirects to a parking page featuring several pay-per-click links. Complainant states that such use of the disputed domain name does not characterize a bona fide offering of goods and services, nor is it a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Complainant also argues that Respondent does not actively use the disputed domain name which is an evidence of bad faith. \r\n\r\nRespondent did not reply to Complainant’s contentions and is therefore in default.", "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 that the Respondent has 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": [ "Nathalie Dreyfus" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2019-01-29 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "Complainant, VIVENDI, is the owner of several International trademark registrations such as:\r\n\r\n- The International trademark VIVENDI No. 687855 registered and duly renewed since February 23, 1998, in classes 09, 35 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42. This trademark is inter alia protected in the United Kingdom, where Respondent is located.\r\n\r\n- The International semi figurative trademark VIVENDI No. 706637 registered and duly renewed since December 22, 1998, in classes 01, 06, 09, 11, 17, 19, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, also protected in several territories, including the United Kingdom.\r\n\r\nComplainant also owns the domain name registered on November 11, 1997 and communicates through it.\r\n", "decision_domains": { "VIVENDI.CLUB": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }