FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n
The Complainant is a financial institution which is the owner of the BOURSORAMA trademark. Under such mark, it engages in its three core businesses of online brokerage, delivery of financial information on the Internet and online banking. The Complainant asserts that it operated the first national financial and economic information site and the first online banking platform in France. It has a portal at “www.boursorama.com”, and claims over four million customers. The Complainant owns a number of domain names incorporating the BOURSORAMA mark, including <boursorama.com>, registered since March 1, 1998.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain names were registered on January 13, 2023 and resolve to parking pages with commercial links.<\/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 names.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "
Complainant:
The disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark and associated domain names. The obvious misspellings are characteristic of typosquatting practice intended to create confusing similarity with the Complainant’s trademark, namely the addition of a letter “m” at the end of the disputed domain name <boursoramam.com> and the deletion of the letter “a” replaced by the term “mama” at the end of the disputed domain name <boursormama.com>. The addition of the gTLD suffix “.com” is insufficient to escape this finding.<\/p>\n
The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names. It is not commonly known as the disputed domain names and the WhoIs information is not similar thereto. The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names, nor is related in any way to the Complainant. The Complainant has no business with the Respondent, and no license or authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant’s trademark, including in the disputed domain names. The Respondent is not using the disputed domain names for a bona fide offering of goods or services, or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. The disputed domain names are used in connection with pay-per-click websites diverting traffic to third party websites not affiliated with the Complainant. Such use of a domain name to host competing hyperlinks or to redirect Internet users to websites unrelated to a complainant does not represent a bona fide offering of goods or services where it competes with or capitalizes on the reputation and goodwill of the Complainant’s mark or otherwise misleads Internet users.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith. They each contain the Complainant’s distinctive and well-known trademark, such that the Respondent must have known about the Complainant and its rights when it registered them. The disputed domain names resolve to parking pages with commercial links. The Respondent has attempted to attract Internet users for commercial gain to its own website due to the Complainant’s trademarks, for commercial gain, which is evidence of bad faith.<\/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 names are 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 names (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 names have been registered and are 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": [ "Andrew Lothian" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-02-15 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant is the owner of the following European Union registered trademark:<\/p>\n
BOURSORAMA, word mark, registered on October 19, 2001 under number 1758614, for goods and services in Nice Classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42.<\/p>", "decision_domains": { "boursoramam.com": "TRANSFERRED", "boursormama.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }