{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-104642",
    "time_of_filling": "2022-06-13 09:23:37",
    "domain_names": [
        "ikks.vip"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Denisa Bilík (CAC) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "IKKS GROUP"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "Xiang Gang"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant draws Panel attention to previous UDRP decisions:\r\n\r\n- WIPO Case No. D2006-0451, F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG v. Macalve e-dominios S.A. (“It is also well established that the specific top level of a domain name such as “.com”, “.org” or “.net” does not affect the domain name for the purpose of determining whether it is identical or confusingly similar.”)\r\n\r\n- Forum Case No. FA 1781783, Skechers U.S.A., Inc. and Skechers U.S.A., Inc. II v. Chad Moston \/ Elite Media Group <bobsfromsketchers.com> (“Here, the WHOIS information of record identifies Respondent as “Chad Moston \/ Elite Media Group.” The Panel therefore finds under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii) that Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii).”).\r\n\r\n- Forum Case No. FA 156251, Am. Int’l Group, Inc. v. Busby (finding that the respondent attempts to pass itself off as the complainant online, which is blatant unauthorized use of the complainant’s mark and is evidence that the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name).\r\n\r\n- Forum Case No. 1770729, UNFCU Financial Services, LLC d\/b\/a Industrial Coverage v. Clark Lienemann (“Use of a confusingly similar domain name to pass off as complainant to conduct a phishing scheme is evidence of bad faith under Policy ¶”);\r\n\r\n- Forum Case No. 1760987, Ripple Labs Inc. v. Thomas Viva Vivas (“Use of a domain name to create confusion as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of competing content therein can evidence bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv).”).\r\n\r\nPARTIES' CONTENTIONS:\r\n\r\nCOMPLAINANT:\r\n\r\nI. The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the protected mark\r\n\r\nAccording to the Complainant, the disputed domain name <ikks.vip> is confusingly similar to the IKKS mark as it fully incorporates the IKKS mark in its entirety, without any addition or deletion, adding the purely generic top-level domain (“gTLD”) “vip”.\r\n\r\nII. The Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name\r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name and is not related in any way with the Complainant. The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. \r\n\r\nNeither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademark IKKS, or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant.\r\n\r\nMoreover, the disputed domain name points to a login page displaying the Complainant’s trademark. The Complainant claims that this page could be used in order to collect the personal information of the Complainant’s clients.\r\n\r\nAccording to the Complainant, the Respondent’s website cannot be considered as a bona fide offering of services or fair use, since the website can mislead the consumers into believing that they are accessing the Complainant’s website.\r\n\r\nIII. The disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith\r\n\r\nThe Complainant claims that the disputed domain name was registered and is used in bad faith. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant provides that the disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s distinctive trademark IKKS. The Respondent has registered the disputed domain name several years after the registration of the trademark IKKS by the Complainant, which has established a strong reputation while using its trademark. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant contends that the term “IKKS” does not have any signification, except in relation to the Complainant. \r\n\r\nAccording to the Complainant, the Respondent should have known about the Complainant’s rights, which evidences bad faith. \r\n\r\nFinally, the disputed domain name points to a login page displaying the Complainant’s trademark. The website does not contain any information about the Respondent. Therefore, by using the disputed domain name, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to his website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of his websites (par. 4(b)(iv) of the Policy). ",
    "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 <ikks.vip>.",
    "no_response_filed": "RESPONDENT:\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": [
        "Mgr. Barbora Donathová, LL.M."
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2022-07-13 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "IKKS GROUP (the Complainant) is an apparel company founded in 1986 and is based in Saint-Macaire-en-Mauges, France. The company owns and operates apparel retail stores that sell apparel and clothing accessories. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant is the owner of several trademarks worldwide, such as: \r\n\r\n- European trademark IKKS n° 002255552 registered since June 12th, 2001; \r\n- International trademark IKKS n° 782171 registered since May 2nd, 2002;\r\n- European trademark IKKS n° 002913929 registered since October 30th, 2002.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant also owns an important domain names portfolio, including the same distinctive wording \"IKKS\", such as the domain name <ikks.com> registered and used for its official website since April 2nd, 1998.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name has been registered on June 3rd, 2022. ",
    "decision_domains": {
        "IKKS.VIP": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}