{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-103915", "time_of_filling": "2021-07-07 09:16:31", "domain_names": [ "boursorama-s2s.com", "boursorama-ss2.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "BOURSORAMA SA" ], "complainant_representative": "Nameshield (Enora Millocheau)", "respondent": [ "zack levy" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nFounded in 1995, BOURSORAMA S.A., the Complainant, was one of the very first online financial platforms in Europe. It grew into a market leader in its three core businesses: online brokerage, financial information on the Internet and online banking. Today in France, BOURSORAMA is a leading online banking provider and its portal at www.boursorama.com has millions of customers. \r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name was registered on 27 June 2021 and is inactive. The disputed domain name was registered on 30 June 30 2021 and resolves to an error page. \r\n\r\nThese same parties were involved in a dispute in this forum earlier this year, CAC case no. 103813. That case concerned the two domain names: and . The Complainant succeeded in that case in May 2021 and those domains were found to have been registered and used in bad faith. \r\n\r\nIn that case the added material was \"DPS2\" there representing “Directive on Services for Payment with 2 factors” a commonly used abbreviation and name, for the Directive (EU) 2015\/2366 of 25 November 2015 on payment services in the internal market, amending Directives 2002\/65\/EC, 2009\/110\/EC and 2013\/36\/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093\/2010, and repealing Directive 2007\/64\/EC. The Panel found the added abbreviation related to the Complainant's banking activities and, as combined with the Complainant's well known trademark BOURSORAMA, did not avoid confusing similarity between the disputed domain names and the Complainant's trademark. \r\n\r\nHere the Complainant says the additional material in the disputed domain names is also an abbreviation and a misspelt version of the term “PSD2” (meaning “Payments Service Directive 2”, referring to a Directive of the European Parliament on payment services within the internal market. \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 names.", "no_response_filed": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant alleged that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to its trademark BOURSORAMA as the disputed domain names include the Complainant’s BOURSORAMA trademark in its entirety, while the additional material does not change the overall impression of the designation. It says it is well-established that “a domain name that wholly incorporates a Complainant’s registered trademark may be sufficient to establish confusing similarity for purposes of the UDRP”. Please see WIPO Case No. D2003-0888, Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG v. Vasiliy Terkin. \r\n\r\nReferences: \r\n\r\n- WIPO Case No. D2000-1164, Boeing Co. v. Bressi; \r\n\r\n- The Forum Case No. FA 1773444, Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc. v. Joannet Macket \/ JM Consultants; \r\n\r\n- CAC Case No. 101131, BOURSORAMA v. PD Host Inc - Ken Thomas; \r\n\r\n- WIPO Case No. D2017-1463, Boursorama SA v. Estrade Nicolas. \r\n\r\n\r\nThe Complainant further asserts that the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain names, and was neither licensed nor otherwise authorized by the Complainant to use its trademark BOURSORAMA as part of the disputed domain names. Further, the disputed domain names are not used in relation with a website and the Respondent did not make any use of disputed domain names since its registration, and the Respondent has no demonstrable plan to use the disputed domain names since its registration. Therefore the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain names. See for instance the Forum Case No. FA 1781783, Skechers U.S.A., Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II v. Chad Moston \/ Elite Media Group . \r\n\r\nAs to Bad Faith, the Complainant's trademark BOURSORAMA is well known and the Complainant contends that it is therefore reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the disputed domain names with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark BOURSORAMA. \r\n\r\nReferences\r\n\r\n- WIPO Case No. D2000-0003, Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows;\r\n\r\n- WIPO Case No. D2000-0400, CBS Broadcasting, Inc. v. Dennis Toeppen.\r\n\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT:\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": [ "Victoria McEvedy" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2021-08-10 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant relies on its various registered marks including its EU Trade Mark no. 001758614 for the word mark BOURSORAMA registered on 19\/10\/2001 in classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42. It also has various subsequent national registered marks in France. It also relies on its use online of its related domain names, including registered in 1998. Further it relies on the protection offered by French national laws on unfair competition. ", "decision_domains": { "BOURSORAMA-S2S.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "BOURSORAMA-SS2.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }