The Complainant, with origins since at least 1998, is the online banking reference with over 6 million customers in France, operating under the BOURSORAMA brand.<\/p>\n
The Complainant’s portal <boursorama.com> is the first French national financial and economic information site and the first French online banking platform. <\/p>\n
The Complainant is the owner of the French trademark \" BOURSO®” since 2000.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name <boursogroup.info> was registered on June 12, 2024, by the Respondent Peter Lawrence based in the United States and resolves to an inactive page.<\/p>\n
According to the Complainant’s non-contested allegations, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect of the disputed domain name, and he is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business.<\/p>\n
The Registrar of the disputed domain name confirmed that the Respondent is the current Registrant, and that English is the language of the registration agreement.<\/p>\n
The facts asserted by the Complaint are not contested by the Respondent.<\/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 name.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "
The Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it.
No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>\n
COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n
First element: Confusingly similar to the protected mark <\/strong><\/p>\n The Complainant states that the disputed domain name <boursogroup.info> is confusingly similar to its trademark “BOURSO®” and the Complainant’s domain names associated therewith.<\/p>\n The Complainant asserts that the addition of the term “GROUP”“ does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the Complainant’s trademark BOURSO®. Further, the addition of this term does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant, its trademark and associated domain names.<\/p>\n Second element: Rights or legitimate interest<\/strong><\/p>\n The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name and that is the Respondent is not related in any way to the Complainant’s business.<\/p>\n The Complainant indicates that the Respondent is not known as the disputed domain name. In accordance with the Complainant’s allegations, past panels have held that a respondent was not commonly known by a disputed domain name if the Whois information was not similar to the disputed domain name. Thus, the Complainant argues that the Respondent is not known as the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n The Complainant asserts that the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized in any way to use the Complainant’s trademark BOURSO®. 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’s trademark BOURSO® or to apply for registration of the disputed domain name incorporating it.<\/p>\n The Complainant indicates that the disputed domain name resolves to an inactive page which indicates that the disputed domain name is not in use nor is there any demonstrable plan to use the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n Third element: The disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith<\/strong><\/p>\n The Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its distinctive trademark BOURSO®, in use since 1995 and with a significant reputation in France and abroad in connection with online financial services. The Complainant asserts that the status of its BOURSO® trademark has been affirmed by a prior decision. See WIPO Case No. D2021-0671-, Boursorama S.A. v. Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 1249617786 \/ Marcou) (“Not only are the Complainant's BOURSORAMA and BOURSO trademarks perfectly arbitrary, but they are also well known in France. As for the term \"service\", it is descriptive of the services likely to be rendered by the Applicant online to its customers, like any banking institution. Thus, the combination of the terms SERVICE and BOURSO was devised by the Respondent with the aim of creating confusion with the Applicant's brands.” [Note, this quote is translated from the French language decision by Google translate])<\/p>\n According to the Complainant, the most of the search result of the terms “BOURSO GROUP” refer to the Complainant.<\/p>\n In light of the distinctiveness of the Complainant’s trademarks and reputation, the Complainant contends that it is reasonable to infer that the Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name with full knowledge of the Complainant's trademarks.<\/p>\n Further, the Complainant claims that the lack of active use of the disputed domain name is evidence of bad faith, because it is not possible to conceive of any plausible active purpose thereof that would not be infringing on the Complainant’s rights .<\/p>\n Finally, the Complainant notes that the configuration of MX servers associated with the disputed domain name suggests that it may be actively used for email purposes.<\/p>\n For these reasons, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.<\/p>\n RESPONDENT<\/p>\n The Respondent did not reply to the Complaint.<\/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": [
"Claire Kowarsky"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2024-07-16 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant is the owner of the French trademark “BOURSO®”, no. 3009973 registered since February 22, 2000, in classes 9, 35, 36, 38, 41 & 42.<\/p>\n In addition, the Complainant owns domain names comprising of or including the term “ BOURSO®” such as <bourso.com> registered since January 11, 2000.<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"boursogroup.info": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}