{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-101648",
    "time_of_filling": "2021-03-03 00:00:00",
    "domain_names": [
        "KSBKY.COM"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Denisa Bilík (CAC) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "KSB SE & Co. KGaA"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "Convey srl",
    "respondent": [
        "shang hai kai yu beng ye you xian gong si"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "The Complainant, KSB SE & Co. KGaA, is a large supplier of pumps, valves and related systems for building services, industry and water transport, waste-water treatment and power plant processes. It was founded in Frankenthal, Germany, in 1871. The mark KSB is the acronym of the Complainant’s founders’ surnames: Johannes Klein, Friedrich Schanzlin and Jakob Beckker. Today, the Complainant has a presence globally with its own sales and marketing organizations, manufacturing facilities and service operations. The Complainant employs more than 15,000 people with 190 service centres. The Complainant’s second-largest market is Asia Pacific. Outside Europe, the Complainant’s biggest production sites are in Brazil, China, India and the USA. Since 1994, the Complainant has set up seven company branches, employing 900 people with more than 30 service centres including in China. The Complainant’s official global and local websites in China connect customers to its official sales and service locations. \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name, <KSBKY.com>, was registered on May 4, 2011 which resolves to an inactive webpage.\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": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.\r\n\r\nPARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the KSB mark on the basis that the disputed domain name wholly incorporates the Complainant’s trademark and the addition the letters “KY” and generic top-level domain name suffix (“gTLD”) “.com” are insufficient to avoid the finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its KSB mark.\r\nThe Complainant also argues that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name. In addition, the Respondent is not affiliated with the Complainant nor did the Complainant license or authorize the Respondent to use the KSB mark.\r\nThe Complainant further asserts that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith as the Respondent should have known of the Complainant’s KSB mark at the time of registration of the disputed domain name. The Complainant also asserts that the Respondent is attempting to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to the Respondent’s website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the Respondent’s website or of a product or service on the Respondent’s website.",
    "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.  \r\nPreliminary Issue: Language of Proceedings\r\n\r\nParagraph 11 of the Rules provides that:\r\n“(a) Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, or specified otherwise in the Registration Agreement, the language of the administrative proceeding shall be the language of the Registration Agreement, subject to the authority of the Panel to determine otherwise, having regard to the circumstances of the administrative proceeding.”\r\nThe language of the Registration Agreement for the disputed domain name <KSBKY.COM> is Chinese.\r\nThe Complainant requested that the language of the proceeding be English for the following reasons:\r\n(i)\tthe disputed domain name is in English;\r\n(ii)\tthe Respondent deactivated the website after receiving the Complainant’s cease and desist letter in English;\r\n(iii)\tthe Respondent is in the sector of import and export of industrial automation products and control components wherein English is the primary language for international relations and business; and\r\n(iv)\tthe proceeding will be put through unnecessary trouble and delay if Chinese were made the language of the proceeding.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent did not comment on the language of the proceeding. \r\n\r\nThe Panel cites the following with approval: “Thus, the general rule is that the parties may agree on the language of the administrative proceeding.  In the absence of this agreement, the language of the Registration Agreement shall dictate the language of the proceeding.  However, the Panel has the discretion to decide otherwise having regard to the circumstances of the case.  The Panel’s discretion must be exercised judicially in the spirit of fairness and justice to both parties taking into consideration matters such as command of the language, time and costs.  It is important that the language finally decided by the Panel for the proceeding is not prejudicial to either one of the parties in his or her abilities to articulate the arguments for the case.”  (See Groupe Auchan v. xmxzl, WIPO Case No. DCC2006 0004).\r\n\r\nHaving considered the above factors, the Panel determines that English be the language of the proceeding. The Panel agrees that the Respondent appear to be familiar with the English language, taking into account their selection of the English-language trademark and the domain name in dispute. In the absence of an objection by the Respondent, the Panel does not find it procedurally efficient to have the Complainant translate the Complaint and evidence into Chinese. \r\n\r\n",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Mr. Jonathan Agmon"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2021-04-16 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner of the following international trademark registrations of KSB designating China:\r\n-\tInternational Registration No. 452821 which was registered on May 22, 1980;\r\n-\tInternational Registration No. 662585 which was registered on July 12, 1996;\r\n-\tInternational Registration No. 407021 which was registered on April 26, 1974;\r\n-\tInternational Registration No. 1466266 which was registered on December 19, 2018;\r\n-\tInternational Registration No. 1463039 which was registered on December 19, 2018; and\r\n-\tInternational Registration No. 679050 which was registered on July 14, 1997.\r\nThe Complainant also holds the domain name registrations which contain the KSB trademark, <www.ksb.com>, <www.ksb.cn> and <www.ksb.com.cn>.\r\n",
    "decision_domains": {
        "KSBKY.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}