{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-104651",
    "time_of_filling": "2022-06-17 09:16:04",
    "domain_names": [
        "zadigvoltairefr.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Denisa Bilík (CAC) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "Z&V"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "Qin Deng"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:\r\n\r\nThe Complainant, operating under the brand ZADIG & VOLTAIRE, is a French company in the fashion industry. Established in 1997 by Thierry Gillier, the brand ZADIG & VOLTAIRE stands for ready-to-wear fashion, accessories and perfumes.\r\n\r\nIn addition to the asserted trademarks, the Complainant also holds a domain names portfolio comprising the same distinctive wording “ZADIG & VOLTAIRE”, such as the domain name <zadig-et-voltaire.com> registered and used for the Complainant’s official website since 16 May 2002.\r\n\r\nThe disputed domain name <zadigvoltairefr.com> was registered on 9 June 2022 and redirects to a website purporting to be an online store selling the Complainant’s ZADIG & VOLTAIRE products at discounted prices.\r\n\r\nThe Registrar confirmed that the Respondent is the current registrant of the disputed domain name and that the language of the registration agreement is English.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent has not filed a Response.",
    "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\nThe Complainant made the following contentions:\r\n \r\nThe Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark “ZADIG & VOLTAIRE” as it incorporates the Complainant’s trademark, without the “&”. The Complainant contends that it does not eliminate the likelihood of confusion with the trademark and refers to earlier UDRP case law according to which ampersands are prohibited characters in domain names and the omission of ampersands is therefore disregarded from the similarity analysis (Forum Case No. FA 1764056).\r\n\r\nMoreover, the Complainant asserts that the addition of the term “FR” is not sufficient to escape the finding that the domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark and branded goods “ZADIG & VOLTAIRE”. It does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademark. It does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant, its trademark and the domain name associated.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant also mentions that it is well-established in UDRP decision-making that “a domain name that wholly incorporates a Complainant’s registered trademark may be sufficient to establish confusing similarity for purposes of the UDRP” (WIPO Case No. D2003-0888).\r\n\r\nFurthermore, the Complainant contends that the addition of the gTLD “.COM” does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademark. It does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant, its trademark and its domain names associated.\r\n\r\nThus, the Complaint concludes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark “ZADIG & VOLTAIRE”.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, the Complainant points to the established case law on prima facie case.\r\n\r\nThe Complainant asserts that the Respondent is not identified in the Whois database as the disputed domain name. Past panels have held that a Respondent was not commonly known by a disputed domain name if the Whois information was not similar to the disputed domain name. Thus, the Respondent is not known as the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nThe Respondent is not known by the Complainant. The Complainant contends that Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by the Complainant in any way. The Complainant contends that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. 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 “ZADIG & VOLTAIRE” or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant.\r\n\r\nFurthermore, the domain name is used to host the website to impersonate the Complainant and attempt to mislead consumers into thinking that the goods purportedly offered for sale on the website originate from Complainant. Such use demonstrates neither a bona fide offering of goods nor a legitimate interest of Respondent. Furthermore, there is no information\/disclaimer on the page of the website to identify its owner. Therefore, the Respondent failed at least in one of the elements of the Oki Data test, i.e. the website linked to the disputed domain name does not disclose accurately and prominently the registrant’s relationship with the trademark holder.\r\n\r\nAccordingly, the Complainant is of the view that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.\r\n\r\nTurning to the bad faith argument, the Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark “ZADIG & VOLTAIRE” which was registered several years before the registration of the disputed domain name. The Complainant is a worldwide and well-known fashion company, and the Respondent makes references to the Complainant’s products and trademarks on the website. On those facts, given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademarks and reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademarks. \r\n\r\nThe Complainant further finds that Respondent registered and uses the domain name in bad faith to create confusion with Complainant’s trademarks for commercial gain by using the confusingly similar domain name to resolve to a website offering counterfeit or unauthorized versions of Complainant’s products in direct competition with the Complainant’s products. Using a confusingly similar domain name to trade upon the goodwill of a complainant can evince bad faith under the Policy.\r\n\r\nBased on the above, the Complainant contends that the Respondent acquired the disputed domain name with the only intention to attract for commercial gain Internet users to the Respondent’s website as mentioned in CAC Case No. 104392, ZV HOLDING v. Luis Alberto Fernandez Garcia.\r\n\r\nOn these bases, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.",
    "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. Vojtěch Chloupek"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2022-07-25 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "The Complainant submitted evidence that it is the registered owner of the following trademarks:\r\n\r\n- the European Union trademark no. 005014171 for the “ZADIG & VOLTAIRE” word in class 3 having protection since 17 March 2006; and\r\n- the international trademark registration no. 907298 for the “ZADIG & VOLTAIRE” word, registered on 15 September 2006 in classes 3, 14, 16, 18, 20, 24, 25, 35 and 43 designating numerous countries around the world and having its basic registration in France.",
    "decision_domains": {
        "ZADIGVOLTAIREFR.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}