{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-107645", "time_of_filling": "2025-06-09 13:36:55", "domain_names": [ "lindtcoupon.com" ], "case_administrator": "Olga Dvořáková (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli AG" ], "complainant_representative": "SILKA AB", "respondent": [ "guy marsal" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

The Complainant states that it is a well-known chocolate maker based in Switzerland, founded in 1845. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant points out that it produces chocolates from 12 own production sites in Europe and the United States. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant underlines that its products are sold by 38 subsidiaries and branch offices, by more than 500 own shops, as well as via a network of over 100 independent distributors around the globe. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant submits that it has around 15,000 employees and reported sales of CHF 5.47 billion in 2024.  <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant clarifies that it holds numerous domain names which encompass the LINDT mark, used to advertise the Complainant’s offerings across a wide range of territories around the world.  <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant observes that it is repeatedly featured in lists collating the largest and most popular chocolate brands in the world.<\/span><\/p>\n

 The Complainant states that it has a strong social media presence with, for example, over 7 million followers on Facebook, more than 180 thousand followers on Instagram, and over 140 thousand followers on LinkedIn.<\/span><\/p>\n

 The Complainant notes that it has been a successful complainant in many previous domain name dispute proceedings involving the LINDT trademark.  <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant considers that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark in which the Complainant has rights, because it incorporates the  Complainant’s trademark, and the fact that it includes the descriptive commercial term ‘coupon’ and the generic top-level domain “.com” does not affect the confusing similarity.<\/span><\/p>\n

 The Complainant submits that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.<\/span> <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

The Complainant points out that to its knowledge, the Respondent does not have trademark rights for, nor is it commonly known by, ‘lindtcoupon’ or any similar term. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant states that the Respondent is not connected to nor affiliated with the Complainant and has not received license or consent to use the LINDT mark in any way.  <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant submits that the Respondent has not used, nor prepared to use, the disputed domain name in connection with a <\/span>bona fide<\/span><\/i> offering of goods or services, nor a legitimate non-commercial or fair use. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant states that, although the disputed domain name does not currently resolve to active content, it previously triggered a browser-generated security warning in Google Chrome stating that attackers on the site might attempt to trick users into installing software or disclosing sensitive information, such as passwords or credit card numbers<\/span>, and considers that such use is clearly indicative of phishing or other deceptive conduct and is fundamentally incompatible with any rights or legitimate interests under the Policy. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant highlights that the nature of the disputed domain name, juxtaposing the Complainant’s LINDT trademark with the descriptive commercial term ‘coupon’, creates a high risk of implied affiliation and cannot constitute fair use.<\/span><\/p>\n

 The Complainant submits that the Respondent has both registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith, in accordance with paragraph 4(a)(iii).<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant underlines that it is internationally established and recognised and that previous UDRP panels have acknowledged the distinctiveness of, and renown and recognition attached to, the Complainant’s trademark.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant considers that, taking into account that basic Google searches for ‘lindt’ and ‘lindtcoupon’ return results clearly related to the Complainant’s products, including official sites and third-party discount platforms, it is evident that the simplest degree of due diligence would have made any prospective registrant of the disputed domain name aware of the Complainant’s rights in the LINDT trademark.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant argues that the structure of the disputed domain name itself evidences deliberate targeting of the Complainant’s trademark and implies an affiliation with, or endorsement by, the Complainant. <\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant adds that the possible use of the disputed domain name, designed in a way aimed at evoking trust, for abusive purposes such as phishing or identity theft, evidenced by the above-mentioned security warning, further supports the inference of bad faith registration and use.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Complainant notes that the disputed domain name is configured with multiple MX records, which strongly suggests that the Respondent has used or intends to use the disputed domain name for email-based phishing, and considers that this constitutes further evidence of bad faith.
<\/span><\/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, relying on the arguments summarised above, contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it.<\/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": [ "Michele Antonini" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-07-19 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant is the owner of numerous registrations for the trademark \"LINDT\", including the international trademark No 217838, registered on March 2, 1959, for goods in class 30.<\/span><\/p>\n

The disputed domain name was registered by the Respondent on January 18, 2025.<\/span><\/p>", "decision_domains": { "lindtcoupon.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }