The Complainant’s company name, SportScheck GmbH, was registered on April 26, 2004, and has remained unchanged since. The Complainant is a well-known retailer of sporting goods—including skiing equipment, apparel, and related accessories—with a legacy tracing back to 1946, when its founder, Mr. Otto Scheck, created his first winter sports collection from repurposed military uniforms. Today, the Complainant is a highly regarded and trusted brand, particularly within Germany. As a modern retailer, the Complainant also operates an online shop under the domain name <sportscheck.com>. <\/p>\n
The disputed domain name was registered on February 19, 2025. As of February 28, 2025, the date on which the Complainant issued a cease-and-desist letter to the Respondent, the website to which the disputed domain name resolved was: <\/p>\n
At present, the disputed domain name no longer resolves to an active website.<\/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": "
COMPLAINANT:<\/p>\n
(i) The Complainant holds rights in the trademarks “SportScheck” (word mark), “SportScheck” (word and device mark), “SportScheck Wir machen Sport,” and “SportScheck RUN” as set forth in the \"Identification of Rights\" section above. The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark “SportScheck” on multiple grounds, including phonetic similarity, visual similarity, conceptual or intellectual similarity, combination with a generic term, and contextual similarity based on associated content. <\/p>\n
(ii) The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. The website to which the disputed domain name resolves, displays pop-up advertisements, and is designed to divert consumers, thereby tarnishing the Complainant’s trademark and reputation. Furthermore, the Respondent is using the disputed domain name in a manner that falsely suggests affiliation with or authorization by the Complainant, amounting to impersonation and deliberate misrepresentation. <\/p>\n
(iii) The disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith, thereby satisfying the cumulative requirement under the Policy that both bad faith registration and bad faith use be established. The Respondent registered the disputed domain name incorporating a well-known and widely recognized trademark, “SportScheck,” with no rights or legitimate interests in doing so. The disputed domain name resolved to a website that not only included misleading pop-up advertisements, but also infringed upon the Complainant’s intellectual property rights more broadly. The Respondent’s actions appear aimed at attracting Internet users for commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant, particularly given the substantial similarity between the Respondent’s website and the Complainant’s official website. Moreover, the disputed domain name has been associated with a website that contains links either directly to the Complainant’s website or that exploit the Complainant’s reputation for the purpose of misdirection and unfair competition. These circumstances, taken together, constitute clear evidence of bad faith registration and use under the Policy. <\/p>\n
RESPONDENT:<\/p>\n
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": [ "Mr. Ho-Hyun Nahm Esq." ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-04-12 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "
The Complainant is the registered owner of the trademarks “SportScheck” (word mark), “SportScheck” (word and device mark), “SportScheck Wir machen Sport,” and “SportScheck RUN,” registered with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and the German Patent and Trademark Office (GPTO), as follows: <\/p>\n