{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105209",
    "time_of_filling": "2023-02-17 09:27:49",
    "domain_names": [
        "fashionisabelmarant.com",
        "isabelmarantlady.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "IM PRODUCTION"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "Manlidy (GNN)"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p>The Complainant is a French company specializing in the manufacture and marketing of ready-to-wear, shoes, handbags and jewellery. The Complainant markets these products under the brand \"ISABEL MARANT\", and now has stores around the world.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain names were registered by the same respondent on February 11, 2023 and redirect to a website purporting to be an online store selling the Complainant&rsquo;s ISABEL MARANT products at discounted prices.<\/p>",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "<p>The Panel is unaware of any other pending or decided legal proceedings relating to the disputed domain names.<\/p>",
    "no_response_filed": "<p>COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>The disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The Complainant states that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to its well-known and distinctive trademark &ldquo;ISABEL MARANT&rdquo; and its domain names associated.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant asserts that adding the generic term \"FASHION\" or \"LADY\" is insufficient to avoid the likelihood of confusion. Furthermore, it is well-established that a domain name that wholly incorporates a Complainant&rsquo;s registered trademark may be sufficient to establish confusing similarity for purposes of the UDRP.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the Complainant contends that the gTLD &ldquo;.COM&rdquo; is not relevant in the appreciation of confusing similarity. Finally, the Complainant asserts that its rights over the terms \"ISABEL MARANT\" have been confirmed in several previous UDRP decisions.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark &ldquo;ISABEL MARANT&rdquo;.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The Complainant asserts that the Respondent is not identified in the Whois database as the disputed domain names. 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 names.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests regarding the disputed domain names, and it is unrelated to the Complainant. The Complainant claims that it does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with, the Respondent.<\/p>\n<p>Neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to use the Complainant's trademark, &ldquo;ISABEL MARANT&rdquo; or apply for registration of the disputed domain names by the Complainant.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant maintains that the disputed domain names are used to host websites to impersonate the Complainant and attempt to mislead consumers into thinking that the goods purportedly offered for sale on the websites originate from Complainant. Such use demonstrates neither a bona fide offering of goods nor a legitimate interest of the Respondent.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, there is no information\/disclaimer on the website page to identify its owner. The Complainant argues that, therefore, the Respondent failed at least in one of the elements of the Oki Data test, i.e., the websites linked to the disputed domain names do not disclose accurately and prominently the registrant's relationship with the trademark holder. Thus, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain names.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>The disputed domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The Complainant states that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to its trademark, &ldquo;ISABEL MARANT&rdquo;. The Complainant&rsquo;s trademark was registered several years before registering the disputed domain names. In addition, the trademark &ldquo;ISABEL MARANT&rdquo; and &ldquo;ISABEL MARANT ETOILE&rdquo; are displayed on the websites. Thus, given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademark and its reputation, the Complainant argues that it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered and used the disputed domain names with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant claims that the Respondent registered and uses the disputed domain names in bad faith to create confusion with the Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks for commercial gain by using the confusingly similar domain names to resolve to websites offering counterfeit or unauthorized versions of the Complainant&rsquo;s products in direct competition with the Complainant&rsquo;s products. The Complainant contends that using a confusingly similar domain name to trade upon the goodwill of a complainant can evince bad faith under Policy 4(b)(iv).<\/p>\n<p>Based on the above, the Complainant contends that the Respondent acquired the disputed domain names with the only intention to attract for commercial gain Internet users to the Respondent's websites. On these bases, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain names in bad faith.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>RESPONDENT<\/p>\n<p>No administratively compliant Response was filed.<\/p>",
    "rights": "<p>To the satisfaction of the Panel, the Complainant has shown that the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to the trademark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).<\/p>",
    "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "<p>To the satisfaction of the Panel, the Complainant has 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": "<p>To the satisfaction of the Panel, the Complainant has 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": "<p>The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under UDRP have been met, and there is no other reason why it would be unsuitable for providing the Decision.<\/p>",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Rodolfo Rivas Rea"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-03-14 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p>The Complainant is the owner of the International trademark (Azerbaijan, Switzerland, China, Algeria, Egypt, Croatia, Kazakhstan, Liechtenstein, Morocco, Monaco, Montenegro, Serbia, Russian Federation, Viet Nam) &ldquo;ISABEL MARANT&rdquo; n&deg; 1284453 registered since November 2015 and the European trademark &ldquo;ISABEL MARANT&rdquo; n&deg;001035534 registered since May 2000.<\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "fashionisabelmarant.com": "TRANSFERRED",
        "isabelmarantlady.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}