{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-100806",
    "time_of_filling": "2014-05-27 11:56:45",
    "domain_names": [
        "df888.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Lada Válková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Emphasis Services Limited"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": null,
    "respondent": [
        "Dandan Xie"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant asserts that, through its subsidiaries, it operates websites offering online gaming and betting services with licenses issued in the Philippines and Isle of Man. The Complainant owns and operates several gaming sites under the brand “DAFA” and it has used the name “DAFA” in varying combinations to designate its online gaming and betting offerings for 12 years.\r\n\r\nMoreover, the Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name “DF888.COM” is confusingly similar to the “DAFA” mark owned by the Complainant. According to the Complainant the Respondent has appropriated the trademark “DAFA” by abbreviating it and illegally used Complainant's IP to lead consumers to believe that it is affiliated with the Complainant. \r\n\r\nFurthermore, the Complainant states that it is the owner of intellectual property rights pertaining to “DAFA” due to its registration in various jurisdiction and its usage and notoriety. The Complainant denies any direct connection with the Respondent and claims that the Respondent’s use of the Complainant’s intellectual property in its domain name and website are unauthorized and illegal. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant asserts that the Respondent will not be able to show prior usage, registration or any right to use the mark “DAFA” or \"DF\" for its website and that the Respondent’s illegal usage of the Complainant’s logos, images and content on its website serves only to blatant copy and clone the Complainant’s website in bad faith.\r\n\r\nMoreover, the Complainant states that the Respondent’s illegal use of the Complainant’s intellectual property on its website is indicative of its intentions in using \"DF\" in its domain name. The Respondent is making it appear that its websites are affiliated with the Complainant by not only using the “DAFA” mark in its domain, but also making the website appear almost exactly the same as that of the Complainant. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant asserts that it is evident from screenshots of the Respondent’s websites that the Respondent is not only using the marks of the Complainant in its domain name, but it has virtually cloned the website by illegally using the Complainant’s graphics, images, designs, content and logos. According to the Complainant this is a blatant attempt to deceive the public and so the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract internet users for commercial gain. \r\n\r\nAdditionally, the Complainant alleges that the Respondent is well aware of the fact that the Complainant is the owner of the mark “DAFA” because of \r\n\r\n(i) Registrations in various jurisdictions;\r\n\r\n(ii)\tGoodwill and notoriety of the trademarks;\r\n\r\n(iii)\tthe Respondent’s illegal usage of Complainant’s logos, content, images and designs on its website;\r\n\r\nThe Complainant mentions that the “DAFA” and “DAFABET” are not only registered marks in various jurisdictions, it is likewise well known marks due to sponsorship with the English Premier League and the World Snooker Championship. Moreover, any claim of the Respondent to lack of knowledge over the Complainant’s ownership over the name “DAFA” is negated by the fact that it has used the Complainant’s marks on its website. \r\n\r\nFinally the Complainant states that the Respondent has been sent a cease and desist letter, but no reply was received and the Respondent has persisted in illegal activities.\r\n",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "No other legal proceedings concerning the disputed domain name are currently pending.",
    "no_response_filed": "NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.\r\n\r\n",
    "rights": "The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the 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 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 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": [
        "Mr. Luis H. de Larramendi"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2014-07-04 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "Complainant owns Hong Kong Trademark Registration No. 302048148 for DAFA, filed on October 3, 2011, and Malaysian Trademark Registration No. 2011019075 for DAFA, filed on October 28, 2011, among others. \r\n\r\nFurthermore, Complainant maintains an extensive Internet presence with the domain name and mark DAFA888.COM.\r\n",
    "decision_domains": {
        "DF888.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}