{
    "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-106543",
    "time_of_filling": "2024-05-17 10:28:08",
    "domain_names": [
        "canalfootball.club"
    ],
    "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)",
    "complainant": [
        "GROUPE CANAL +"
    ],
    "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.",
    "respondent": [
        "Domain Privacy (Domain Name Privacy Inc)"
    ],
    "respondent_representative": null,
    "factual_background": "<p>The Complainant is the French audiovisual media group and it is very active in the field of production of pay-TV and theme channels and bundling and distribution of pay-TV services. According to the Complainant, it is active in over 40 countries, with 26,4 million subscribers worldwide and its revenue in 2023 amounts to 6.058 million euros.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>The Complainant also produces and broadcasts a show dedicated to football called \"CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB\". This TV show was created in 2008 and it is broadcasted weekly on the French channel &ldquo;CANAL+&rdquo;.<\/p>\n<p>The disputed domain name was registered on May 24, 2023 and it currently resolves to a parking page with sponsored links (pay-per-click links or PPC links). According to the Complainant, at the time of filing of the complaint, the disputed domain name redirected to various pornographic websites or parking pages with commercial links.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><\/p>",
    "other_legal_proceedings": "<p><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain name.<\/span><\/span><\/p>",
    "no_response_filed": "<p><span>The Complainant contends that all 3 UDRP elements are establish in the present case. In particular, the Complainant argues that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB trademark, since the <\/span><span>use of the terms &ldquo;CANAL&rdquo; and &ldquo;FOOTBALL&rdquo; as a second-level portion of the disputed domain name is likely to create a risk of confusion with the Complainant's services. Furthermore, the Complainant underlines that the combination of second-level portion of the disputed domain name \"CANAL FOOTBALL\" with the new gTLD \".club\" increases the likelihood of confusion, since it reproduces the Complainant&rsquo; trademark CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB in its entirety.<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span>Regarding the second UDRP element, the Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name and it is not related in any way with the Complainant. <\/span><span>The Complainant does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. Neither license nor authorization has been granted to the Respondent to make any use of the Complainant&rsquo;s trademark, or apply for registration of the disputed domain name by the Complainant. To the best of the Complainant&rsquo;s knowledge, the Respondent did not either apply for or obtained any trademark registration related to the sign CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB. <\/span><span>Also, the Respondent is not commonly known under the disputed domain name. Finally, the Complainant underlines that use of the disputed domain name for redirection to various pornographic websites indicates neither a <em>bona fide<\/em> offering of goods or services under paragraph 4(c)(i) of the Policy, nor a non-commercial or fair use pursuant to paragraph 4(c)(iii) of the Policy.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>With respect to the third UDRP element, the Complainant holds that its CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB trademark is well-known in the field of football television content and that the TV show with the same name has been broadcasted on French \"Canal+\" since 2008, i.e. long before the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name. The combination of the words \"CANAL\" and \"FOOTBALL\" and its association with the new gTLD \".club\" cannot be fortuitous. The Respondent, therefore, could not have ignored the Complainant&rsquo;s CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB trademark at the moment of the registration of the disputed domain name. Regarding the use of the disputed domain name in bad faith, the Complainant contends that use of the disputed domain name for redirection to various pornographic websites or parking pages with commercial links cannot be observed as the use in good faith. Furthermore, the Complainant also contends that the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its website or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant&rsquo;s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the Respondent&rsquo;s website or location or of a product or service on the Respondent&rsquo;s website or location in accordance with paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy.<o:p><\/o:p><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">No administratively compliant response has been filed.<\/span><\/span><\/p>",
    "rights": "<p><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).<\/span><\/span><\/p>",
    "no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": "<p><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">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).<\/span><\/span><\/p>",
    "bad_faith": "<p><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">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).<\/span><\/span><\/p>",
    "procedural_factors": "<p><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under the UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.<\/span><\/span><\/p>",
    "decision": "Accepted",
    "panelists": [
        "Stefan Bojovic"
    ],
    "date_of_panel_decision": "2024-06-26 00:00:00",
    "informal_english_translation": "<p><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">The Complainant has demonstrated ownership of rights in the trademark CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB for the purposes of standing to file a UDRP complaint.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">In particular, the Complainant is the owner of trademark registrations for CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB, including the following:&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">- International trademark registration No. 1005878 for CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB (word mark), registered on December 15, 2008, duly renewed and covering goods and services in classes 9, 16, 35, 38 and 41;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">- French trademark registration No. 3584437 for CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB (word mark), registered on June 25, 2008, duly renewed and covering goods and services in classes 9, 16, 28, 35, 38 and 41.&nbsp;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\"><span style=\"vertical-align: inherit;\">The Complainant also refers to ownership over the domain name &lt;canalfootballclub.com&gt; that incorporates its CANAL FOOTBALL CLUB trademark, and which is registered since June 24, 2008.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>",
    "decision_domains": {
        "canalfootball.club": "TRANSFERRED"
    },
    "panelist": null,
    "panellists_text": null
}