{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102419",
    "time_of_filling": "2019-04-08 13:16:59",
    "domain_names": [
        "df6262.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Šárka Glasslová (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Emphasis Services Limited"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [
        "xiaoyu wang"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant, Emphasis Service Limited, through its subsidiaries and licensees, operates websites offering online gaming and betting with licenses issued in the Philippines, Curacao, UK, Ireland and Kenya. The Complainant owns and operates several gaming sites under the brand \"dafa\" (i.e. dafabet.com, dafabet.co.ke and dafa888.com). The Complainant is regarded as a prominent e-gaming operator worldwide (ranked 23rd among most influential e-gaming operators in the world by eGaming Review).\r\n\r\nThe Complainant has used the name \"Dafa\" in varying combinations to designate its online gaming and betting offerings and has registered its rights over the brand \"Dafa\" in Malaysia, Philippines and Hong Kong. The Complainant also has registered its rights over the graphical representation of the brand \"Dafabet\" in various jurisdictions.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant's brand \"Dafabet\" is well-known because of various sponsorships of commercial clubs (Official Main Team Sponsor of Fulham FC; Official Main Club Sponsor of Celtic FC; Official Betting Partner of Leicester City FC; Official Betting Partner Wales; Official Title Sponsor Masters-Snooker; previously also Fnatic eGaming Team; Aston Villa F.C.; West Bromwich Albion F.C.; Everton F.C.; Burnley F.C.; Blackburn Rovers F.C.; Sunderland F.C.).\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was registered on 10 January 2017.\r\n\r\nOn 4 April 2019, the Complainant sent a cease and desist letter by email to 0f155605fa6b48e0be3ee11c7715e8db.protect@whoisguard.com  (WhoisGuard Protected). On 5 April 2019, the Registrant of the disputed domain name (Namecheap, Inc.) informed the CAC that WhoisGuard Inc. is no longer providing any services to the disputed domain name and provided the current details of the Respondent. The Registrant also confirmed that the language of the registration agreement is English.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent has not filed a Response.",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any pending or decided legal proceedings which relate to the disputed domain name.",
    "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant made the following contentions: \r\n\r\nWith respect to identical or similar domain, the Complainant asserts that the disputed domain is confusingly similar to the brand owned by the Complainant (dafa), except with the deletion of letters but maintaining phonetic similarity with that owned by the Complainant. Further, the Complainant claims that the contents of the domains involved reveal that they are basically clones of the Complainant's website and illegally use the Complainant's graphics, images, designs, content and logos. \r\n\r\nRegarding Respondent's rights or legitimate interests, the Complainant argues that the Respondent does not have any legal right to use the name \"dafa\" as part of its domain name. The Complainant states that the Respondent is not in any way connected with the Complainant nor is it authorized to use the Complainant's intellectual property rights for its operations as a licensee or in any capacity. Further, the Complainant submits that illegal use by the Respondent of the Complainant's graphics, images, designs, content and logos is indicative of the Respondent's intention to deceive users to think that their websites are affiliated with the Complainant.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant asserts it is the owner of intellectual property rights pertaining to \"Dafa\" and \"Dafabet\" due to its registration in various jurisdiction and its usage and notoriety. The Complainant also expressly denies any direct connection with the Respondent and confirms that the Respondent's use of the Complainant's intellectual property in its domain name and website are unauthorized and illegal. \r\n\r\nAccording to the Complainant, the Respondent will not be able to show prior usage, registration or any right to use the mark \"Dafa\" or \"Dafabet\" for its website. The Complainant further asserts that the Respondent's illegal usage of the Complainant's logos, images and content on its website amounts to blatant copying and cloning of the Complainant's website in bad faith.\r\n\r\nTurning to the bad faith argument, the Complainant makes the following assertions:\r\n\r\n•\tThe Respondent is not only using the marks of the Complainant in its domain name, but it has virtually cloned the website by illegally using the Complainant's graphics, images, designs, content and logos. The Complainant argues that this is a blatant attempt to deceive the public in thinking that they are associated with the Complainant and transact business with them.\r\n\r\n•\tThe Respondent is well aware that the Complainant is the owner of the mark \"Dafa\" and \"Dafabet\" because of registrations in various jurisdictions; goodwill and notoriety of the trademarks; the Respondent's illegal usage of the Complainant's logos, content, images and designs in its website.\r\n\r\n•\t\"Dafa\" and \"Dafabet\" designations are not only registered marks in various jurisdictions, but are also well known marks due to sponsorship with well known football clubs, the English Premier League and the World Snooker Championship. The Complainants further submits that the fact the Respondent expressly uses the name \"Dafa\" on its website supports the finding that the Respondent is aware of the Complainant's rights in the name. \r\n\r\n•\tThe Complainant states that the Respondent was sent a cease and desist letter but did not reply and have persisted in their illegal activities.\r\n\r\n•\tThe Complainant further claims that the Respondent's bad faith is supported by the fact that this Complaint is the second time that a UDRP case is being filed by the Complainant against the Respondent, noting that in UDRP Case No. 101053, the CAC found for the Complainant against the Respondent involving similar domains containing the same infringing content.",
    "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": [
        "Mgr. Vojtěch Chloupek"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2019-06-05 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the registered owner of several trade marks for \"DAFA\" and graphical representation of \"dafabet\". The Complainant submitted evidence of the following trade mark registrations:\r\n\r\n(i) Hong Kong SAR trade mark registration no. 302048148 for \"DAFA\", registered on 3 October 2011 in class 41;\r\n(ii) Malaysia trade mark registration no. 2011019075 for \"DAFA\", registered on 28 October 2011 in class 41;\r\n(iii) Philippines trade mark registration no. 42014505034 for \"DAFABET\", registered on 24 October 2014 in classes 38 and 41; and\r\n(iii) EU trade mark registration no. 012067138 for \"d dafabet\", registered on 17 February 2014 in classes 38 and 41.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "DF6262.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}