{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-105915",
    "time_of_filling": "2023-10-26 09:23:14",
    "domain_names": [
        "vivendiboutique.com"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "  Iveta Špiclová   (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "VIVENDI"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "Skenzo Brokerage Team"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p>The Complainant, Vivendi, is a French multinational mass media conglomerate headquartered in Paris. The Complainant is active in music, television, film, video games, telecommunications, tickets and video hosting service and employs about 38 315 employees with total revenues of &euro;9.6 billion worldwide in 2022.<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain name &lt;vivendiboutique.com&gt; was registered on October 16, 2023, and resolves to a registrar parking page with commercial links. Additionally, the disputed domain name is offered for sale.<\/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 &lt;vivendiboutique.com&gt;.<\/p>",
    "no_response_filed": "<p>COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the protected mark<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>As regards the first element of the Policy, the Complainant supports that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its VIVENDI trademark, as it incorporates the trademark in its entirety.<\/p>\n<p>According to the Complainant, the addition of the French generic term \"BOUTIQUE\" to the trademark VIVENDI is not sufficient to escape the finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark and branded goods VIVENDI.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, the Complainant concludes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark VIVENDI.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>As regards the second element of the Policy, the Complainant denies that the Respondent has been authorized to use the trademark VIVENDI in the disputed domain name. According to the Complainant, the Respondent is not known by the Complainant and has never been affiliated with the Complainant nor authorized by the Complainant in any way to use the VIVENDI trademark.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the disputed domain name resolves to a registrar parking page with commercial links. The Complainant considers that the current use of the disputed domain name does not represent a bona fide offering of goods or services nor a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has no right nor legitimate interest in respect of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>As regards the third element of the Policy, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name and uses it in bad faith.<\/p>\n<p>Given the distinctiveness of the Complainant's trademarks and worldwide reputation, the Complainant argues that it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademark.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, the disputed domain name resolves to a registrar parking page with commercial links. The Complainant contends the Respondent has attempt to attract Internet users for commercial gain to his own website thanks to the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark for its own commercial gain, which is evidence of bad faith.<\/p>\n<p>Finally, the Complainant contends that Respondent registered the disputed domain name with intent to sell it in bad faith within the meaning of Policy 4(b)(i).<\/p>\n<p>On these bases, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p>RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n<p>NO ADMINISTRATIVELY COMPLIANT RESPONSE HAS BEEN FILED.&nbsp;<\/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": [
        "Barbora Donathová"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2023-11-29 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p><span>The Complainant owns the following trademark registrations for &ldquo;VIVENDI&rdquo;: <\/span><br \/><br \/><span>- International trademark VIVENDI&reg; n&deg; 687855, registered and renewed since February 23, 1998;<\/span><br \/><br \/><span>- International trademark VIVENDI&reg; n&deg; 930935 registered and renewed since September 22, 2006.<\/span><br \/><br \/><\/p>\n<p>The Complainant also owns various domain names, such as &lt;vivendi.com&gt; (registered on November 12, 1997) and the domain name &lt;vivendigroup.net&gt; (registered on November 29, 2016).<\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "vivendiboutique.com": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}