{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105304", "time_of_filling": "2023-03-27 09:53:40", "domain_names": [ "myversuni.com", "versunibrands.com", "versunidesign.com", "versuniglobal.com", "versunii.com", "versuniphilips.com", "versuniprice.com", "versunireview.com", "versunisource.com" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Uccello Limited" ], "complainant_representative": "Coöperatieve Vereniging SNB-REACT U.A.", "respondent": [ "Alelie Pilar" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

FACTS ASSERTED BY THE COMPLAINANT AND NOT CONTESTED BY THE RESPONDENT:<\/span>

The Complainant states that it is the owner of the “Versuni” trademarks, which refer to the new corporate name of the well-known producer of consumer goods, Philips Domestic Appliances.  The Complainant clarifies that Versuni is headquartered in the Netherlands, is active in more than 100 countries and operates in kitchen appliances and other household products, climate care, garment and floor care.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant underlines that it is the owner of the “Versuni” trademark since May 3, 2022, and that the nine disputed domain names have been registered several months later, on September 20, 2022. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant observes that the disputed domain names incorporate the “Versuni” trademark in its entirety. The Complainant notes that previous panels have held domain names to be confusingly similar if the entirety of a trademark, or where at least a dominant feature of the relevant mark is recognizable in the domain name. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant notes that the Respondent has added to the \"Versuni\" trademark various generic terms, such as “my”, “brands”, “design”, “global”, “price”, “review” and “source” and that the addition of such generic terms cannot prevent a finding of confusing similarity. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant furthermore emphasizes that the applicable TLD is a standard requirement of registration and as such should be disregarded under the first UDRP element.<\/span><\/p>\n

As regards the disputed domain name <versunii.com>, the Complainant submits that it consists of a misspelling of the Complainant’s trademark due to the addition of the letter ‘I’. <\/span><\/p>\n

 As regards the disputed domain name <versuniphilips.com>, the Complainant points out that it is a combination of its own trademark and the well-known “Philips” trademark and that the addition of a second trademark, even if the latter is well-known, is on itself insufficient to avoid a finding of confusing similarity, since the Complainant’s trademark is recognizable within the disputed domain name.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant notes that, according to the available Whois information, all disputed domain names have been registered several months after the registration and use of the Complainant's trademark.
The Complainant considers that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests to use the Complainant’s trademark in a confusingly similar manner within the disputed domain names. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant states that it has no relationship whatsoever with the Respondent and has never licensed or otherwise authorized the Respondent to use the “Versuni” trademark in the disputed domain names. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant points out that it has exclusive trademark rights which predate the registration of the disputed domain names. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant submits that the Respondent cannot demonstrate any legitimate offering of goods or services under the \"Versuni\" trademark. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant considers that in the absence of a license or permission from the Complainant concerning the use of its trademark, no bona fide or legitimate use of the disputed domain names can reasonably be claimed.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant argues that no credible evidence that the Respondent is commonly known by the domain name is shown.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant considers that the Respondent does not hold any trademark or service mark right on the \"Versuni\" trademark. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant highlights that the use of the “Versuni” trademark on the Respondent’s websites does not prove that the Respondent, or any business or organization represented by it, is commonly known by the word \"Versuni\".<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant notes that a Respondent’s use of a domain name will not be considered fair if it falsely suggests affiliation with the trademark owner.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant observes that the Respondent has registered seven domain names which consist of the “Versuni” trademark and an additional generic term, one domain name which is a clear example of “typosquatting” and one domain name which combines the “Versuni” trademark and the “Philips” trademark. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant underlines that all the disputed domain names resolve to a nearly identical kind of parked page where “pay per click” links are visible. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant argues that the Respondent's intention is that consumers who are looking for the Complainant's website will find one of the disputed domain names and the corresponding websites and subsequently generate revenue for the Respondent.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant considers that the fact of registering many variations containing the \"Versuni\" trademark in combination with other elements amounts to a ‘pattern of conduct’, supporting a finding of abusive registration.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant reminds that it is the owner of the “Versuni” trademark since May 3, 2022 and that the disputed domain names fully incorporate the Complainant's trademark and have been registered on the same day, namely on September 20, 2022. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant argues that it is implausible to believe that the Respondent did not have any actual knowledge of the Complainant’s trademark when it registered the disputed domain names. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant highlights that the registration of <versuniphilips.com> underlines the likelihood that the Respondent had some knowledge regarding the change of the corporate name from \"Philips Domestic Appliances\" to \"Versuni\". <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant considers that the Respondent has attempted to cause confusion in internet users by registering several domain names which bear the Complainant’s trademark in its entirety together with a generic term.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant recalls that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names, and that they were registered for the commercial benefit of the Respondent, who generates revenues by using \"pay per click\" links on the corresponding websites.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant adds that the Respondent uses a privacy protection service on all the disputed domain names to hide its identity and considers that this may constitute evidence of bad faith.<\/span><\/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": "

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": [ "Michele Antonini" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-05-02 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the registrant of the Benelux trademark registration No. 1463339 “VERSUNI\", registered on May 3, 2022, for goods and services in classes 3, 7, 8, 9, 11, 21, 30, 35, 37, 41 and 42.<\/span>

The disputed domain names were registered by the Respondent on September 20, 2022.<\/span><\/p>", "decision_domains": { "myversuni.com": "TRANSFERRED", "versunibrands.com": "TRANSFERRED", "versunidesign.com": "TRANSFERRED", "versuniglobal.com": "TRANSFERRED", "versunii.com": "TRANSFERRED", "versuniphilips.com": "TRANSFERRED", "versuniprice.com": "TRANSFERRED", "versunireview.com": "TRANSFERRED", "versunisource.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }