{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-101066", "time_of_filling": "2015-11-13 13:49:35", "domain_names": [ "dafa0808.com", "dafa6969.com", "dafa8989.com", "dafa9998.com", "dafa5558.com", "dafa6668.com", "dafa7778.com", "dafa88vip.com", "df0001.com", "df8808.com", "df8828.com", "df8878.com", "df88888.com", "df8898.com" ], "case_administrator": "Lada Válková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Emphasis Services Limited" ], "complainant_representative": null, "respondent": [ "dai yushu" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant, Emphasis Service Limited, through its subsidiaries and licensees, operates websites offering online gaming and betting with licenses issued in the Philippines, Isle of Man and the United Kingdom. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant owns and operates several gaming sites under the brand “DAFA” (i.e. dafabet.com & dafa888.com). \r\n\r\nThe Complainant has, for 13 years, used the name “DAFA” in varying combinations to designate its online gaming and betting offerings.\r\n \r\nThe Complainant has registered its rights over the brand “DAFA” in Malaysia and Hong Kong and has secured a CTM registration (under the name of its licensee Asian BGE (Isle of Man) Limited and is in the process of assignment to the Complainant) for the name and graphic representation (logo) for “DAFABET”. \r\n\r\n“DAFABET” is a well-known mark and is currently the Official Main Club Sponsor for the Sunderland and Blackburn Rovers Football Clubs, Official International Betting Partners for Everton and Celtic Football Clubs (where the DAFABET mark and logo are prominently displayed). Further, DAFABET has also sponsored high level sporting events such as the World Snooker Championship among others. DAFABET was also named by eGaming Review as 21st among the 50 most influential e-gaming operators in the world.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent registered the disputed domain names on 17 June 2014.", "other_legal_proceedings": "Paragraph 4(c) of the Supplemental Rules provides that: “Any proceeding(s) against a domain name holder with a later Time of Filing with respect to the same domain name(s) shall be suspended pending the outcome of the proceeding initiated by the Complaint with the earliest Time of Filing.” \r\n\r\nIn CAC Case No. 101068, the Complainant commenced proceedings against the Respondent regarding the domain name dafa88vip.com. By decision dated 16 November 2015, the domain name dafa88vip.com was transferred to the Complainant. \r\n\r\nAs a result the proceedings in respect of the domain name dafa88vip.com, which are referred to in the current Complaint (CAC Case No. 101066) have been terminated and the Panel makes no finding regarding that domain name.", "no_response_filed": "PARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\nA. Identical or Confusingly Similar\r\nThe Complainant asserts that the domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant's “DAFA” trade mark, to which the Respondent has merely added numbers. Further, regarding the domain names with the prefix “df”, the Complainant submits that there is a phonetic similarity with the Complainant's mark of \"DAFA \" in that the pronunciation of the trade mark is the same as the spoken \"df\", used in the domain names with the prefix “df”.\r\n\r\nB. Rights or Legitimate Interests\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of the \"DAFA\" mark. The Complainant denies any direct connection with the Respondent and says that the Respondent’s use of the Complainant’s intellectual property in its domain name and website is unauthorized and illegal. The Respondent is unable to show prior usage, registration or any right to use the mark “DAFA” for its website and its use of the Complainant’s logos, images and content on its website amounts to blatant copying and cloning of the Complainant’s website in bad faith.\r\n\r\nC. Bad Faith\r\nThe Complainant asserts that the Respondent’s illegal use of the Complainant’s intellectual property on its website is indicative of its intentions. By using the Complainant’s mark “DAFA” in the domain names, the Respondent is trying to make it appear that its websites are affiliated with the Complainant. As evidenced by the screenshots of the Respondent’s websites, it is not only using the Complainant's marks in the domain names, but it has copied the Complainant's website by illegally using the Complainant’s graphics, images, designs, content and logos. The Complainant asserts that this is a blatant to attempt to deceive the public in thinking that the Respondent is associated with the Complainant and so transact business with the Respondent.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant says that the Respondent is well aware that the Complainant is the owner of the trade marks “DAFA” and “DATABET” because of the Complainant's registrations in various jurisdictions; the goodwill and notoriety of the trade marks due to sponsorship with the English Premier League and the World Snooker Championship; and the Respondent’s illegal usage of Complainant’s logos, content, images and designs in its website. Any claim of Respondent to lack of knowledge over 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\nThe Complainant says that the Respondent has been sent a cease and desist letter, but no reply was received and the Respondent has persisted in their illegal activities.\r\n\r\n\r\nRESPONDENT: \r\nNO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.", "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": [ "Mrs Veronica Bailey" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2016-01-12 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant is the owner of:\r\n\r\n(i)\tHong Kong SAR trade mark registration no. 302048148 for “DAFA”, registered on 3 October 2011 in class 41.\r\n\r\n(ii)\tMalaysia trade mark registration no. 2011019075 for “DAFA”, registered on 28 October 2011 in class 41.\r\n\r\n(iii)\tCTM trade mark registration no. 012067138 for “DAFABET”, registered on 17 February 2014 in classes 38 and 41.\r\n\r\n(iv) Philippines trade mark registration no. 42014505034 for “DAFABET”, registered on 24 October 2014 in classes 38 and 41. ", "decision_domains": { "DAFA0808.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DAFA6969.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DAFA8989.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DAFA9998.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DAFA5558.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DAFA6668.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DAFA7778.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DF0001.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DF8808.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DF8828.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DF8878.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DF88888.COM": "TRANSFERRED", "DF8898.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }