{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-103687", "time_of_filling": "2021-03-25 10:04:07", "domain_names": [ "ikeahomesmart.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Inter IKEA Systems B.V." ], "complainant_representative": "Convey srl", "respondent": [ "huang wei" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "The Complainant, Inter IKEA Systems B.V., is one of the most well-known home furnishing brands in the world with more than 400 stores, roughly 220,000 employees worldwide in more than 50 markets and almost a billion visitors per year. The Complainant was founded in 1943 by Ingvar Kamprad to sell household goods like pens, wallets and picture frames. The international expansion of the IKEA business began with establishments of small start-up stores in Norway in 1963 and in Denmark in 1969. In 1973, the first IKEA store outside Scandinavia was established in Switzerland, followed by stores in Germany in the coming years. The Complainant started its retail operations in China in 1998 and now operates a network of 20 stores, 3 distribution centres, 7 delivery centres and an experience centre. In 2018, an e-commerce platform to provide services for 227 Chinese cities was launched and on March 2020, the Complainant and Alibaba announced the opening of the IKEA virtual store on the Alibaba e-commerce platform T-mall, in order to become more accessible for the many people in China. The Complainant offers and sell smart home products under the IKEA HOME SMART mark. These include smart lighting, smart blinds, wireless chargers and smart sound systems. \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name, , was registered on August 18, 2019 which resolved to a parking page of a domain name marketplace which was offered for sale. \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 IKEA mark on the basis that the disputed domain name wholly incorporates the Complainant’s trademark with the addition of the suffix “homesmart” 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 IKEA mark.\r\n\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 IKEA mark.\r\n\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 IKEA 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. The Complainant further asserts that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name to capitalize on the reputation and goodwill of the Complainant’s IKEA mark and sell the domain for profit.\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.\r\n\r\nPreliminary Issue: Language of Proceedings\r\n\r\nParagraph 11 of the Rules provides that:\r\n\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\n\r\nThe language of the Registration Agreement for the disputed domain name is Chinese.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant requested that the language of the proceeding be English for the following reasons:\r\n\r\n(i) the disputed domain name is in English;\r\n\r\n(ii) the website under the disputed domain name is in the English language;\r\n\r\n(iii) the Respondent responded to the Complainant’s cease and desist letter in English; and\r\n\r\n(iv) the proceeding will be put through unnecessary trouble and delay if Chinese were made the language of the proceeding.\r\n\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 his 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. ", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Mr. Jonathan Agmon" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2021-05-19 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner of the following trademark registrations of “IKEA” and “IKEA HOME SMART” (the “IKEA mark”):\r\n\r\n- German Trademark Registration No. DE867152 for IKEA registered on March 12, 1970;\r\n\r\n- U.S.A. Trademark Registration No. 1118706 for IKEA figurative registered on May 22, 1979;\r\n\r\n- U.S.A. Trademark Registration No. 1661360 for IKEA registered on October 22, 1991;\r\n\r\n- European Union Trademark Registration No. 000109637 for IKEA figurative registered on February 22, 1999;\r\n\r\n- European Union Trademark Registration No. 000109652 for IKEA registered on April 22, 2002;\r\n\r\n- European Union Trademark Registration No. 013699228 for IKEA HOME SMART registered on July 3, 2015; and \r\n\r\n- European Union Trademark Registration No. 015786361 for IKEA HOME SMART registered on January 27, 2017.\r\n\r\n\r\nThe Complainant also owns the domain names , , , , , , among many others.", "decision_domains": { "IKEAHOMESMART.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }