{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-102863", "time_of_filling": "2020-01-20 10:05:25", "domain_names": [ "biodermaevent.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "NAOS" ], "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Enora Millocheau)", "respondent": [ "Ian Chu" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "As the Respondent did not file any response to the complaint, the Panel took into account the following facts asserted by the Complainant (and supported by the documentary evidence submitted by the Complainant) and unchallenged by the Respondent:\r\n\r\n(a) Founded in France 40 years ago by Jean-Noël Thorel, a pharmacist-biologist, NAOS is a major player in skincare thanks to its three brands: Bioderma, Institut Esthederm and Etat Pur. Ranked among the top 10 independent beauty companies, NAOS is a pioneer in biology and shifts the Skincare industry paradigm. NAOS owes its success to the dedication of more than 2,900 employees located around the world through its international presence based on 46 subsidiaries and long-term partnerships with local distributors. To sell its branded products BIODERMA® in over 90 countries, the Complainant operates under the name BIODERMA;\r\n\r\n(b) The Complainant owns the Complainant's Trademarks; and\r\n\r\n(c) The disputed domain name was registered on 15 November 2019 and points to a page using the Complainant’s Trademarks and logo to promote an event allegedly related to the Complainant’s products, to which internet users can register through an online form. ", "other_legal_proceedings": "The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings that relate to the disputed domain name.", "no_response_filed": "THE COMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nIn addition to the above factual assertions, the Complainant also contends the following:\r\n\r\n(i) The disputed domain name contains Complainant’s Trademarks followed by the generic term “event”. The domain name concludes with the top-level domain name “.com”. The differences between disputed domain name and Complainant’s Trademarks are insufficient to distinguish one from the other;\r\n\r\n(ii) The Respondent is not affiliated with the Complainant nor authorized by it in any way to use Complainant’s Trademarks. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. Neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s Trademarks or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant. Moreover, the website operated under the disputed domain name displays Complainant’s Trademarks and logo and promote an event related to the Complainant’s Trademarks and products, to which internet users can register through an online form. The Complainant contends that this attempts to pass itself off as Complainant in furtherance of an attempt to collect personal information cannot be considered a bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate non-commercial or fair use. Therefore, the Respondent has no legitimate interest in the disputed domain name;\r\n\r\n(iii) Given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's Trademarks and reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's Trademarks. 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 Trademarks as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of his website. Furthermore, the website operated under the disputed domain name displays Complainant’s Trademarks and logo and promote an event allegedly related to the Complainant’s Trademark and products to which the Internet users can register through an online form. The Complainant asserts that the Respondent attempts to pass off as the Complainant in order to obtain personal data from Internet users, who are misled into believing that the website is supported by or connected to the Complainant, i.e. the Complainant's Trademarks are misused for phising operation. This amounts to bad faith in registration and use of the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\n\r\nTHE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Respondent did not provide any response to the complaint.", "rights": "The Panel concluded that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s Trademarks within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.\r\n\r\nFor details, please see \"Principal Reasons for the Decision\".", "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.\r\n\r\nFor details, please see \"Principal Reasons for the Decision\".", "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.\r\n\r\nFor details, please see \"Principal Reasons for the Decision\".", "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": [ "Michal Matějka" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2020-02-14 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant owns the following trademarks:\r\n\r\n- the International trademark BIODERMA® n° 267207 registered since 19 March 1963;\r\n\r\n- the International trademark BIODERMA® n° 510524 registered since 9 March 1987;\r\n\r\n- the International trademark BIODERMA® n° 678846 registered since 13 August 1997; and\r\n\r\n- the European trademark BIODERMA® n°003136892 registered since 15 April 2003;\r\n\r\n(\"Complainant's Trademarks\").\r\n\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was registered on 15 November 2019.", "decision_domains": { "BIODERMAEVENT.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }