{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102546",
    "time_of_filling": "2019-06-27 11:43:21",
    "domain_names": [
        "BANCAINTESANPAOLO.COM"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Šárka Glasslová (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A."
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Perani Pozzi Associati",
    "respondent": [
        "Milen Radumilo"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant claims it is the leading Italian banking group and also one of the protagonists in the European financial arena. Intesa Sanpaolo 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\nThe Complainant states and provides evidence of his well-known trademarks and provides a list of some of its trademark registrations.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant provides that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name \"BANCAINTESAPAOLO.COM\"  (\"Domain Name\") on November 8, 2018.\r\n\r\nPARTIES’ CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\n• The domain name is confusingly similar to the protected mark\r\n\r\nAccording to the Complainant, the Respondent’s registered Domain Name is identical, or - at least- confusingly similar, to the Complainant’s trademarks “INTESA SANPAOLO” and “BANCA INTESA SANPAOLO”. Essentially, the Respondent has appropriated the trademark “BANCA INTESA SANPAOLO” with the mere substitution of the term “INTESA” with the abbreviation “INTE” to lead consumers to believe that it is affiliated with the Complainant. This, according to the Complainant, represents a clear example of typosquatting.\r\n\r\n• Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest in the domain name\r\n\r\nThe Complainant argues that the Respondent has no rights on the disputed Domain Name, and any use of the trademarks “INTESA SANPAOLO” and “BANCA 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\n• The domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith\r\n\r\nThe Complainant claims that the Domain Name was registered and is used in bad faith. The Complainant’s trademarks “INTESA SANPAOLO” and “INTESA” are distinctive and well known all around the world. The fact that the Respondent has registered a Domain Name that is confusingly similar to them indicates that the Respondent had knowledge of the Complainant’s trademark at the time of registration of the disputed Domain Name. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends it is evident from a basic Google search in respect of the wordings “INTESA SANPAOLO” and “INTESA”, that the same would have yielded obvious references to the Complainant. This raises a clear inference of knowledge of the Complainant’s trademark on the part of the Respondent. Therefore, it is more than likely that the Domain Name at issue would not have been registered if it were not for Complainant’s trademark. This is clear evidence of registration of the Domain Name in bad faith.\r\n\r\nMoreover, the disputed Domain Name is not used for any bone fide offerings. More particularly, there are present circumstances indicating that, by using the Domain Name, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to his web site, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of his web site (par. 4(b)(iv) of the Policy).\r\n\r\nThe Complainant provides that several services can be detected, but not in good faith: in fact, the Domain Name is connected to a website sponsoring, among others, banking and financial services, for whom the Complainant’s trademarks are registered and used. Consequently, Internet users, while searching for information on the Complainant’s services, are confusingly led to the websites of the Complainant’s competitors, sponsored on the websites connected to the Domain Name at issue.\r\n\r\nTherefore, the Complainant deems that the Respondent has registered and is using the Domain Name at issue in order to intentionally divert traffic away from the Complainant’s web site.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant claims that the 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. So, the Respondent’s conduct is even worse (see WIPO Decisions n. D2000-1500, Microsoft Corporation v. StepWeb, and D2001-1335, The Vanguard Group, Inc v. Venta). \r\n\r\n\r\n",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other pending or decided legal proceedings relating to the disputed Domain Name.",
    "no_response_filed": "RESPONDENT:\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": [
        "Mgr. Barbora Donathová, LL.M."
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2019-11-21 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is an Italian banking group which was established on 1 January 2007 resulting from the merger of Banca Intesa S.p.A and San Paolo IMI S.p.A being effected. Intesa Sanpaolo is among the top banking groups in the eurozone, with a market capitalisation exceeding 32,1 billion euro, and the undisputed leader in Italy, in all business areas (retail, corporate and wealth management). \r\n\r\nThe Complainant further states and provides evidence to support, that it is the owner, among others, of multiple trademark registrations for the trademarks “INTESA SANPAOLO” and “BANCA INTESA SANPAOLO”:\r\n\r\n• International trademark registration n. 920896 “INTESA SANPAOLO”, granted on March 7, 2007 and duly renewed, in connection with classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42;\r\n• EU trademark registration n. 5301999 “INTESA SANPAOLO”, filed on September 8, 2006, granted on June 18, 2007 and duly renewed, in connection with the classes 35, 36 and 38;\r\n• EU trademark registration n. 5302377 “BANCA INTESA SANPAOLO”, filed on September 8, 2006, granted on July 6, 2007 and duly renewed, in connection with the classes 35, 36 and 38.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant also provides that it is the owner, among the others, of the following domain names bearing the signs “INTESA SANPAOLO” and “BANCA INTESA SANPAOLO”: INTESASANPAOLO.COM, .ORG, .EU, .INFO, .NET, .BIZ, INTESA-SANPAOLO.COM, .ORG, .EU, .INFO, .NET, .BIZ and BANCAINTESASANPAOLO.COM, .EU, .INFO, .BIZ, .ORG, .NET.\r\nAll of them are now connected to the official website www.intesasanpaolo.com.\r\n",
    "decision_domains": {
        "BANCAINTESANPAOLO.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}