{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105356",
    "time_of_filling": "2023-04-14 08:46:43",
    "domain_names": [
        "arceloimittal.cam"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "ARCELORMITTAL"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "Patricia Walsh"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p>The Complainant is a Luxembourg company that is<strong> <\/strong>the largest steel producing company in the world. It is the owner of the international trademark n&deg; 947686 ARCELORMITTAL&reg; registered by it on August 3, 2007 via WIPO.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant also owns numerous domain names including &lt;arcelormittal.com&gt; which it has had registered since January 27, 2006 and which it uses in its business.<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain name <strong>&lt;arceloimittal.cam&gt;<\/strong> was registered by the Respondent on April 6, 2023 and it is used so as to resolve to a parking page with commercial links of suppliers in competition with the Complainant.<\/p>\n<p>It has come to the notice of the Complainant that the disputed domain name has been registered by the Respondent with a slight change to the spelling of the trademark, showing the potential for confusing internet users who would naturally assume that the domain name is an official domain name of the Complainant and that it would lead to an official website, neither of which is correct. The Complainant is also concerned that the domain name resolves to a website carrying commercial links. This conduct by the Respondent is obviously inimical to the interests of the Complainant and will do damage to its trademark and wider commercial activities. The Complainant therefore brings this proceeding to have the domain name transferred to itself.<\/p>",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "<p>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": "<p><strong>COMPLAINANT<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Complainant made the following contentions.<strong><br \/><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Complainant is a Luxembourg company that is<strong> <\/strong>the largest steel producing company in the world.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant is the owner of the international trademark n&deg; 947686 ARCELORMITTAL&reg; registered by it on August 3, 2007 via WIPO.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant also owns an important domain names portfolio, such as the domain name &lt;arcelormittal.com&gt; which it has had registered since January 27, 2006 and which it uses in its business.<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain name &lt;<strong>arceloimittal.cam<\/strong>&gt; was registered by the Respondent on April 6, 2023 and it is used so as to resolve to a parking page with commercial links.<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant therefore brings this Complaint and will establish the following contentions.<br \/><br \/><br \/><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong><u> The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights<\/u><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>The disputed domain name &lt;<strong>arceloimittal.cam<\/strong>&gt; is confusingly similar to the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark ARCELORMITTAL&reg;.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The obvious misspelling of the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark ARCELORMITTAL&reg; (i.e. the substitution of the letter &ldquo;R&rdquo; by the letter &ldquo;I&rdquo;) is characteristic of the practice of typosquatting which is intended to create confusing similarity between the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark and the disputed domain name. It is well established that spelling variations do not prevent a domain name from being confusingly similar to the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark but enhance it.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the addition of the New generic Top-Level Domain suffix &ldquo;.cam&rdquo; does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the trademark ARCELORMITTAL&reg; of the Complainant. Nor does it prevent the likelihood of confusion between the domain name and the relevant trademark.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, the disputed domain name &lt;arceloimittal.cam&gt; is confusingly similar to Complainant&rsquo;s trademark ARCELORMITTAL&reg;.<\/p>\n<p><strong>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <\/strong>2.<strong> <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Complainant is first required to make out a <em>prima facie <\/em>case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n<p>That is so because the Respondent is not commonly known by the domain name as the Whois database shows that the registrant&rsquo;s name is not similar to the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name &lt;<strong>arceloimittal.cam<\/strong>&gt; as it is not related in any way with the Complainant and the Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor does it have any business with, the Respondent.<\/p>\n<p>Neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark ARCELORMITTAL&reg;, or to register the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain name is also a typosquatted version of the Complainant&rsquo;s ARCELORMITTAL&reg; trademark.<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain name also resolves to a parking page with commercial links showing that the Respondent has no right to register the domain name and is not using it for a legitimate non-commercial or fair use.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the Respondent has no right or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name &lt;arceloimittal.cam&gt;.<br \/><br \/><\/p>\n<p><strong>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <\/strong>3.<strong> <span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">The disputed domain name<em> <\/em>was registered and is being used in bad faith<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain name &lt;<strong>arceloimittal.cam<\/strong>&gt; was registered and has been used in bad faith because it is confusingly similar to the ARCELORMITTAL&reg; trademark<\/p>\n<p>The trademark is also a famous mark and the Respondent must have known of it and of the Complainant when it registered the domain name. Accordingly, it must be inferred that the Respondent registered the domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark and therefore in bad faith.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the misspelling of the trademark ARCELORMITTAL&reg; was clearly intentional and designed to be confusingly similar to the trademark.<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain name also resolves to a parking page with commercial links. The Respondent has thus attempted to attract Internet users to its own webpage for commercial gain by using the Complainant&rsquo;s trademarks, which is evidence of bad faith.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, MX servers are configured which suggests that the disputed domain name may be actively used for e-mail purposes.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has registered and used the disputed domain name &lt;arceloimittal.cam&gt; in bad faith.<br \/><br \/><\/p>\n<p><strong>RESPONDENT<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The Respondent did not file a Response in this proceeding.<\/p>",
    "rights": "<p>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": "<p>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": "<p>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": "<p>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": [
        "Neil Brown"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-05-11 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p>The evidence shows that the Complainant is the owner of the international trademark n&deg; 947686 ARCELORMITTAL&reg; registered by it on August 3, 2007 via WIPO.<\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "arceloimittal.cam": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}