{ "case_number": "CAC-UDRP-107860", "time_of_filling": "2025-08-20 09:31:31", "domain_names": [ "vioohs.com" ], "case_administrator": " Iveta Špiclová (Czech Arbitration Court) (Case admin)", "complainant": [ "VIOOH Limited" ], "complainant_representative": "NAMESHIELD S.A.S.", "respondent": [ "Yi Wei Wong" ], "respondent_representative": null, "factual_background": "

A<\/strong>. Complainant<\/strong>'s Factual Assertions<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant, which stands for 'Viewed Impressions for Out of Home', is a subsidiary of JCDECAUX established in 2018 as a global platform for automated Out-of-Home advertising.<\/p>\n

B<\/strong>. <\/span>Respondent<\/strong>'<\/span>s Factual Assertions<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Respondent has failed to submit a Response in this UDRP administrative proceeding, leaving the Complainant's assertions unchallenged.<\/p>", "other_legal_proceedings": "

The Panel is not aware of any pending or concluded legal proceedings concerning the domain name <vioohs.com> (hereinafter referred to as 'the disputed domain name').<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "

A<\/strong>. Complainant<\/strong>'s Submissions<\/strong><\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.1 The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trade mark VIOOH. The addition of the letter 's' does not diminish this similarity and constitutes an instance of typosquatting. Previous UDRP decisions confirm that minor spelling variations do not preclude a finding of confusion. Moreover, the inclusion of the generic Top-Level Domain (TLD) <.com> does not alter the perception that the disputed domain name is connected to the Complainant's trade mark, resulting in a clear likelihood of confusion.<\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.2 The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant has established a prima facie<\/em> case demonstrating that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The absence of the Respondent's identity in the Whois database, combined with the lack of any affiliation or authorisation from the Complainant, supports this assertion. The Complainant has no business relationship with the Respondent and has neither granted nor licensed the use of the trade mark VIOOH. The inactive status of the disputed domain name further underscores the Respondent's lack of rights or legitimate interests.<\/p>\n

A<\/strong>.3 The Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith<\/strong><\/p>\n

The similarity to the Complainant's trade mark indicates registration in bad faith. The Respondent's inactivity renders it implausible to conceive of legitimate use, suggesting the disputed domain name is held solely to infringe upon the Complainant's trade mark rights. The configuration of MX records implies potential email use, reinforcing the Respondent's intent to misuse the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.  <\/p>\n

 A<\/strong>.4 Relief sought<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Complainant requests the transfer of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n

B<\/strong>. <\/span>Respondent<\/strong>'<\/span>s Submissions<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Respondent has failed to provide any substantive defence in this UDRP administrative proceeding. <\/p>", "rights": "

The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the UDRP 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 UDRP 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 UDRP Policy).<\/p>", "procedural_factors": "

The Panel confirms that all procedural requirements under the UDRP have been duly met, with no grounds preventing a decision from being issued. <\/p>", "decision": "Accepted", "panelists": [ "Yana Zhou" ], "date_of_panel_decision": "2025-09-15 00:00:00", "informal_english_translation": "

The Complainant, VIOOH Limited, asserts rights to the following registered trade marks:<\/p>\n

• <\/span>International trade mark registration no. 1436571, registered on 14 May 2018, for the word mark VIOOH, in classes 9, 35, 36, 38, 41, and 42 of the Nice Classification; and<\/p>\n

• <\/span>International trade mark registration no. 1434610, registered on 14 May 2018, for the figurative mark VIOOH, in classes 9, 35, 36, 38, 41, and 42 of the Nice Classification.<\/p>\n

These trade marks are collectively termed 'the Complainant's trade mark' or 'the trade mark VIOOH'.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, the Complainant holds the following domain names featuring the term 'viooh', <viooh.com> and <viooh.net>, both registered in 2017.<\/p>\n

The disputed domain name was registered on 9 August 2025 and currently does not resolve to an active website (hereinafter referred to as 'the Respondent's website').  <\/p>", "decision_domains": { "vioohs.com": "TRANSFERRED" }, "panelist": null, "panellists_text": null }