The Complainant is an Italian banking group which was formed in 2007 following the merger of Banca Intesa S.p.A. and Sanpaulo IMI S.p.A. It has a market capitalisation exceeding EUR 40.3 billion and approximately 3,700 branches in Italy as well as many branches in other countries. The Complainant trades as INTESA SANPAULO and owns many trade marks to protect this trading style including the mark in respect of which full details are given above. It also owns a large number of domain names which comprise or include its trade marks, including <intesasanpaulo.com>, which resolves to its principal website.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name was registered on October 31, 2022. Attempts to access the website to which the disputed domain name resolves generate a warning that it is a deceptive website which may seek to trick Internet users into carrying out dangerous operations such as installing software or revealing personal information.<\/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:
The Complainant says that the disputed domain name is identical or at least confusingly similar to its INTESA SANPAULO trade mark as it exactly reproduces it and simply adds the prefix “IT”, followed by a hyphen. This comprises a clear example of typosquatting.<\/p>\n
The Complainant says also that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. Any use of the Complainant’s INTESA SANPAULO mark has to be authorised by it and it has not authorised or licensed the Respondent to use the disputed domain name. The Respondent is not known as “IT-INTESASANPAULA”, nor is it making any fair or non-commercial uses of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n
Lastly, the Complainant says that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. The Complainant’s INTESA and INTESA SANPAULO trade marks are distinctive and well-known. The fact that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complaint’s INTESA SANPAULO trade mark suggests that the Respondent was aware, should have been aware, of the Complainant’s mark as at the date it registered the disputed domain name and would not have been registered were it not for the Complainant’s trade mark.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name is not being used for any bona fide offering. Moreover, the circumstances indicate that, by using the disputed domain name, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of its website. Considering that the disputed domain name resolves to a website which generates a warning that it is likely to be deceptive, it is clear that the respondent intended to use it for phishing and thereby to defraud the complainant’s customers. Even if the Respondent is not engaged in phishing, there cannot be any possible legitimate use of the disputed domain name by the Respondent, other than to resell it to the Complainant.<\/p>\n
RESPONDENT:
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": [ "Antony Gold" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-02-04 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant is the owner of a number of trade marks for INTESA SANPAULO including, by way of example only, European Union trade mark registration number 530199 for INTESA SANPAULO in classes 35, 36 and 38, applied for on September 8, 2006 and registered on June 18, 2007. <\/span><\/p>", "decision_domains": { "IT-INTESANPAOLO.COM": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }