{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102374",
    "time_of_filling": "2019-03-07 11:28:28",
    "domain_names": [
        "INTESASANPAOLOBLOCKCHAIN.COM"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A."
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Perani Pozzi Associati",
    "respondent": [
        "Pankaj Tanwar"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is the leading Italian banking group and also one of the protagonists in the European financial arena. The Complainant is the company resulting from the merger (effective as of January 1, 2007) between Banca Intesa S.p.A. and Sanpaolo IMI S.p.A., two of the top Italian banking groups.\r\n\r\nIntesa Sanpaolo is among the top banking groups in the eurozone, with a market capitalization exceeding 34,9 billion euro, and the undisputed leader in Italy, in all business areas (retail, corporate and wealth management). Thanks to a network of approximately 4,200 branches capillary and well distributed throughout the Country, with market shares of more than 16 % in most Italian regions, the Group offers its services to approximately 11,9 million customers. Complainant has a strong presence in Central-Eastern Europe with a network of approximately 1.100 branches and over 7,5 million customers. Moreover, the international network specialized in supporting corporate customers is present in 25 countries, in particular in the Mediterranean area and those areas where Italian companies are most active, such as the United States, Russia, China and India. \r\n\r\nOn December 21, 2018, the Respondent registered the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent send a Response on March 30, 2019.\r\n",
    "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": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states that it is more than obvious that the disputed domain name at issue is almost identical to the Complainant’s trademark, as it exactly reproduces the wording “INTESA SANPAOLO”, with the mere addition of the word “Blockchain”, which – according to the dictionary – “is a type of decentralized database system based on linking together previous records in secure blocks of information”. \r\n\r\nConsidering the banking and financial context in which the Complainant operates, it is undeniable that <INTESASANPAOLOBLOCKCHAIN.COM> will result even more confusingly similar to the business carried out under the trademark “INTESA SANPAOLO”, as it will be interpreted by internet users as a reference to the safety of Complainant’s internet banking.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant states furthermore that the Respondent has no rights in the disputed domain name since WhoisGuard, Inc. has nothing to do with Intesa Sanpaolo. In fact, any use of the trademark “INTESA SANPAOLO” has to be authorized by the Complainant. Nobody has been authorized or licensed by the above-mentioned banking group to use the domain name at issue.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name does not correspond to the name of the Respondent and, to the best of Complainant knowledge, WhoisGuard, Inc. is definitely not commonly known as “INTESASANPAOLOBLOCKCHAIN”.\r\n\r\nLastly, Complainant does not find any fair or non-commercial uses of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was in the view of Complainant registered in bad faith and is also being used in bad faith.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant’s trademark “INTESA SANPAOLO” is in in the view of Complainant distinctive and well-known all around the world. The fact that the Respondent has registered a domain name that is confusingly similar to it indicates that the Respondent had knowledge of the Complainant’s trademark at the time of registration of the disputed domain name. In addition, if the Respondent had carried even a basic Google search in respect of the wording “INTESA SANPAOLO”, the same would have yielded obvious references to the Complainant. The Complainant submits, an extract of a Google search in support of its allegation. \r\n\r\nIn addition, the disputed domain name is not used for any bone fide offerings. More particularly, there are present circumstances indicating that, by using the disputed domain name, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to his website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of his website (par. 4(b)(iv) of the Policy). \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name is connected to a website sponsoring, among others, banking and financial services, for whom the Complainant’s trademarks are registered and used. \r\n\r\nThe current use of the disputed domain name, which allows accessing to the web sites of the Complainant’s competitors, also through the Complainant’s trademark, causes, as well, great damages to the latter, due to the misleading of their present clients and to the loss of potential new ones.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent’s commercial gain is evident in the view of Complainant since it is obvious that the Respondent’s sponsoring activity is being remunerated.\r\n\r\nIt shall be underlined in the view of Complainant that on January 23, 2019 the Complainant’s representatives sent to the Respondent a C&D letter, requesting the voluntary transfer of the disputed domain name at issue. The Respondent never complied with the Complainant’s requests.\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Respondent filed the following Response: \r\n\r\n\r\n\"Hello,\r\nIt is my pleasure to hear from you !\r\nWith due respect, what complainant is saying is not true. I have no intention to damage\r\ncredibility and violation of trademark and i was not aware of any bank like this in Italy as i am\r\nfrom India and i can see there is a huge difference between INTESA SANPAOLO &\r\nINTESASANPAOLOBLOCKCHAIN as complaint is working in banking & Financial industry and i\r\nam working in Blockchain industry. I have registered this domain because i am working in\r\nblockchain industry and planning to make a dynamic blockchain website which will help me &\r\nmy community to be aware about blockchain and my website is underdevelopment. I have spent\r\nlot of efforts and money for developing this website which is underdevelopment.\r\nComplainant telling that website can confuse users of his clients and damage the business\r\nwhich is not true as my website is under development and the website is parked for free\r\ntemporarily by the domain registrar. You may check yourself. I am not getting any financial\r\nbenefits from free parked domain and below the website it is clearly mentioned that this ads are\r\nfrom third party and the owner of this domain has not relation with above ads as i am not getting\r\npaid for the free parked domain by Namecheap .\r\nThere is no relation between INTESA SANPAOLO & INTESASANPAOLOBLOCKCHAIN , as\r\nmy domain name is in single word, if it is like this then no one will be able to use any name in\r\nthis world.\r\nRest i have put lots of effort in it, And as a middle class person from India i did not do it\r\nintentionally, i do not have money to fight with such big companies, whatever you will decide,\r\nwith respect I will accept and i wish you understand my situation too.\r\nThank You,\r\nPankaj Tanwar\"\r\n",
    "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": [
        "Jan Christian Schnedler, LL.M."
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2019-04-16 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner, among others, of the following registrations for the trademark “INTESA SANPAOLO”:\r\n\r\n- International trademark registration n. 920896 “INTESA SANPAOLO”, granted on March 7, 2007 and duly renewed, in classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42, covering also Australia, China, United States of America, Japan, Russian Federation;\r\n\r\n- EU trademark registration n. 5301999 “INTESA SANPAOLOargument applied on September 8, 2006, granted on June 18, 2007 and duly renewed, in classes 35, 36 and 38;\r\n\r\n- EU trademark registration n. 5421177 “INTESA SANPAOLO & deviceargues applied on October 27, 2006, granted on November 5, 2007 and duly renewed, in classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42.\r\n\r\nMoreover, the Complainant is also the owner of the following domain names bearing the sign “INTESA SANPAOLO”: “INTESASANPAOLO.COM, .ORG, .EU, .INFO, .NET, .BIZ” and INTESA-SANPAOLO.COM, .ORG, .EU, .INFO, .NET, .BIZ”. All of them are now connected to the official website <www.intesasanpaolo.com>.  ",
    "decision_domains": {
        "INTESASANPAOLOBLOCKCHAIN.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}