{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102536",
    "time_of_filling": "2019-06-18 14:31:25",
    "domain_names": [
        "bitmex.global"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "HDR Global Trading Limited"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "RiskIQ, Inc. c\/o Jonathan Matkowsky",
    "respondent": [
        "Joseph Gasparello"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant is a company based in the Seychelles and runs a Bitcoin-based Peer-to-Peer (P2P) crypto-products trading platform under the name “Bitmex” from a website that uses the domain name <bitmex.com>. The business has been in existence since June 2014 had a presence on the Internet since 2015. It has been the subject of some media coverage including by Bloomberg in August 2017, on CNBC in November 2017, and in Bloomberg News in February 2018 and in various publications including CNN.com, The New York Times, Business Insider, TechCrunch, and CoinDesk. \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) was registered on 2 February 2019. Initially, the Domain Name was been used to host a website that was headed with the text BitMEx Global together with a logo that the Complainant uses in respect of its business. The website appeared to offer information about the Complainant and to promote the Complainant’s services. However, at the bottom of each page in very small text was a disclaimer stating that the website was not associated with BitMEX or the Complainant company.\r\n\r\nThe WhoIs details given for the Respondent in respect of the Domain Name suggest that the Respondent is an individual based in the United States. However, the address given is for a hotel. \r\n\r\nOn 28 March 2019, the Complainant’s representative sent an e-mail to the Respondent, complaining about the Domain Name and the use being made of it, and seeking the transfer to the Complainant of the Domain Name.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent responded on 5 April 2019, claiming that the Domain Name had been registered “with the only purpose of providing free margin trading educational materials to a broad public”, and denying bad faith registration and use, but offering to transfer the Domain Name to the Complainant in return for payment of the “actual expenses for creating and publishing the bitmex.global website content”. In subsequent correspondence the Respondent sought 1 (one) Bitcoin in this respect, which at that time was equivalent to approximately US $5,000. \r\n\r\nAt about this time the Respondent deleted the content appearing on the website operating from the Domain Name and replaced it with a webpage stating that the Domain Name was for sale and providing an e-mail address for the Respondent. \r\n\r\nFurther on 9 May 2019, the Respondent sent a further e-mail to the Complainant stating:\r\n\r\n“Please confirm BitMEX is not interested to move forward with the purchase of the BitMEX.Global domain name. I received a purchase offer from a third party but would prefer to sell the domain name to BitMEX, to avoid its potential noncompliant usage by the above mentioned another party. The [Domain Name] will be sold and transferred to a third party in the next few days if BitMEX is not interested in its purchase.” \r\n\r\nIn subsequent discussions the threat to sell to a third party was repeated on a number of occasions, although the price for sale of the Domain Name was reduced to US $3,000. There also appears to have been an exchange of correspondence in which the Respondent alleged and the Complainant denied, that the Complainant or its representatives had engaged in a “Distributed Denial of Service” attack on the Respondent.\r\n\r\nA web page offering the Domain Name for sale is still displayed from the Domain Name at the date of this decision.   ",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "None of which the Panel is aware.",
    "no_response_filed": "COMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant gives details of its business and marks, how the Domain Name has been used, and its correspondence with the Respondent in relation to possible transfer of the Domain Name. \r\n\r\nIt claims that the initial use of the Domain Name was pursuit to an affiliated marketing program of the Complainant, but contrary to that terms of that program. It also contends that the website operating from the Domain Name also drove traffic to a competing trading platform. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant also alleges that in late May 2019 it received a third party complaint from a person who claimed to have been targeted by a “phishing campaign, where the phish kit was likely being stored on the Domain”. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the Domain Name is identical to its trade marks, comprising its BitMEX mark combined with the new generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”), “global”. \r\n\r\nIt further contends that the use made by the Domain Name and the offer for sale of the Domain Name is such that the Respondent has no right or legitimate interest in the Domain Name and that the Domain Name was registered and is being held in bad faith. In this respect the Complainant refers to section 2.8.1. of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (\"WIPO Overview 3.0\"), and the discussion of the \"Oki Data Test\" contained therein. It also contends that the content of the website operating from the Domain Name is such that the Respondent must have been aware of the Complainant at the time of registration of the Domain Name. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant also claims that the address used by the Respondent is unlikely to be the real address of the Respondent and that this is another factor that supports a finding of bad faith registration and use. \r\n\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nIn his Response the Respondent repeats his claim that the Domain Name was registered with the purpose of providing free educational materials about margin trading. The Respondent admits that the Domain Name was used in connection with the Complainant’s affiliate program but claims that this was to “cover website development costs” and that no monies were received either from the Complainant. The Respondent also does not appear to contest that the website operating from the Domain Name also promoted the services of a competitor of the Complainant, but again claims that no monies were received as a result. \r\n\r\nThe Respondent appears to accept that the Domain Name may have been used to further phishing attaches but that these attacks: \r\n\r\n“were initiated by a bad actor after [the Respondent] removed all website content and placed it for sale, hence, no website users should be exposed to them.\r\n\r\nThe Response does not respond to the Complainant’s contention that a false address has been used by the Respondent in connection with the registration of the Domain Name.       \r\n\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": [
        "Matthew Harris"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2019-06-28 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant relies upon a number of registered trade marks that either comprise or include the term BITMEX. These include: \r\n\r\n1. European trade mark no. 016462327 for the word mark BITMEX in class 36 filed on 14 March 2017 and proceeding to registration on 11 August 2017; and \r\n\r\n2. Singaporean trade mark no. 40201801921P for the conventional mark BitMEX in class 36 filed on 1 February 2018 and proceeding to registration on 30 August 2018. \r\n",
    "decision_domains": {
        "BITMEX.GLOBAL": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}