{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105260", "time_of_filling": "2023-03-07 06:09:01", "domain_names": [ "contactclientgestionbourso.com", "evaluationdesetapesbourso.com", "traitementdossiersbourso.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "BOURSORAMA" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "Marouane Med" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant is a French financial service provider, which was founded in 1995 and today has 4.7 million customers in France. It provides its services and information online at <boursorama.com>. The Complainant also owns the domain name <bourso.com>, which was registered on January 11, 2000.<\/span><\/p>\n

The disputed domain names were registered on February 28, <\/span>2023, and are not used in connection with active websites.<\/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:<\/p>\n

The Complainant argues that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Trademark since they include the Trademark entirely. The addition of the French generic terms \"contact client gestion\" (meaning “customer contact management”), \"evaluation des etapes” (meaning “stage evaluation”), and \"traitement dossiers\" (meaning “file processing”) does not prevent confusion between the disputed domain names and the Trademark. Moreover, the Complainant contends that the TLD “.com” does not prevent confusion either.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant also claims that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest regarding the disputed domain names. The Complainant argues that the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain names, not known to the Complainant, not affiliated or authorized by the Complainant, and has not been granted any license or authorization to use the Trademark or to register the disputed domain names. Furthermore, the (non-)use of the disputed domain names does not constitute any rights or legitimate interest in favor of the Respondent.<\/span><\/p>\n

Regarding bad faith, the Complainant states that the disputed domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith. Concerning bad faith registration, it argues that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the well-known Trademark, and it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent registered the domain names with full knowledge of the Trademark. The Complainant also argues that the addition of several French generic terms related to customer support cannot be coincidental, as it may create confusion in the Complainant's customers’ minds.<\/span><\/p>\n

Regarding bad faith use, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has not demonstrated any activity in respect of the disputed domain names<\/span>, and that it is not possible to conceive of any plausible actual or contemplated active use of the domain names by the Respondent that would not be illegitimate, such as by being a passing off, an infringement of consumer protection legislation, or an infringement of the Complainant’s rights under trademark law. Finally, the Complainant refers to prior decisions under the UDRP, stating that the incorporation of a famous mark into a domain name, coupled with an inactive website, may be evidence of bad faith registration and use.

<\/span><\/p>\n

RESPONDENT:<\/span>

No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/span><\/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).<\/span><\/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).<\/span><\/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).<\/span><\/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.<\/span><\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Peter Müller" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-04-12 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the registered owner of the French trademark registration no. 3009973 \"BOURSO\", registered on July 28, 2000, for various goods and services in classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41, and 42 (hereinafter referred to as the \"Trademark\").<\/span><\/p>", "decision_domains": { "contactclientgestionbourso.com": "TRANSFERRED", "evaluationdesetapesbourso.com": "TRANSFERRED", "traitementdossiersbourso.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }