{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-104893", "time_of_filling": "2022-10-05 09:48:06", "domain_names": [ "infobollore.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "BOLLORE SE" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "Money LUCK" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is a French conglomerate founded in 1822. It<\/span> holds strong positions in all its activities around three business lines: Transportation and Logistics, Communication and Media, Electricity Storage and Solutions. It is one of the 500 largest companies in the world and it is listed on the Paris Stock Exchange with the majority interest of the Group's stock controlled by the Bolloré family. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant owns numerous domain names consisting of the Trademark, with the main one being <bollore.com>, registered on July 25, 1997.<\/span><\/p>\n

The disputed domain name <infobollore.com> was registered on September 18, 2022 and it redirects to a website copying a third-party login page unrelated to the domain name in dispute.<\/p>", "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.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "

COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n

The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Trademark as the disputed domain name incorporates the Trademark in full.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. In this regard, the Complainant states that the Respondent is not a licensee of the Complainant, nor has it been otherwise authorized or allowed by the Complainant to make any use of the Trademark, that the Respondent is not using the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services, that the Respondent is not commonly known by disputed domain name and that the Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name is neither a legitimate non-commercial nor fair use.<\/p>\n

Finally, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. As to bad faith registration, the Complainant contends that the Trademark is a highly distinctive and well-known mark and thus, given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademark and reputation, it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark. The Complainant further asserts that since the disputed domain name redirects to a website copying a third-party login page unrelated to the domain name the Respondent uses the Trademark to promote services unrelated to the domain name, or even to phish for internet users’ credentials. With regard to bad faith use, the Complainant states that the Respondent is using the disputed domain name to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its website or other online location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Trademark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent’s web site or location or of a product or service on Respondent’s web site or location.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n

No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>", "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).<\/p>", "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).<\/p>", "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).<\/p>", "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.<\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Stefanie Efstathiou LL.M. mult." ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2022-11-14 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is owner of several trademarks including the term “BOLLORE”, such as the international trademark registration no. 704697 \"BOLLORE\", <\/span>registered on December 11, 1998 <\/span>(hereinafter referred to as the \"Trademark\").<\/span><\/p>\n

The Trademark has already been considered to be \"well-known\" by previous panels in proceedings under the UDRP (<\/span>CAC Case No. 102015, <\/span>BOLLORE SA v. mich john; <\/em>CAC Case No. 101696, <\/span>BOLLORE v. Hubert Dadoun).<\/em><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>", "decision_domains": { "infobollore.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }