The Complainant is a large international banking group that uses the INTESA and INTESA SANPAOLO marks in providing its financial services.<\/p>\n
It has an established Internet presence. Its main website is at www.intesasanpaolo.com; and additionally, it holds and uses the domain name registrations <intesasanpaolo.eu>, <intesasanpaolo.info>, <intesasanpaolo.biz>, <www.intesasanpaolo.net>, <intesasanpaolo.org> and <intesasanpaolo.in>.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name <intesasanpaolowebsit.com> was registered on April 23, 2025, and resolves to a website that generates a warning message indicating that it may be a dangerous site.<\/p>\n
There is no information available about the Respondent except for that provided in the Complaint, the Registrar’s WhoIs and the information provided by the registrar in response to the request by the Centre for details of the registration of the disputed domain name for the purposes of this proceeding.<\/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.<\/span><\/span><\/p>",
"no_response_filed": " The Complainant<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n The Complainant claims rights in the INTESA and INTESA SANPAOLO trademarks and service marks established by its ownership of its international portfolio of trademark and service mark registrations and extensive use of the marks in its banking business.<\/p>\n The Complainant claims to be among the top banking groups in the Euro Zone, with a market capitalisation exceeding €99,22 billion, a network of approximately 2,800 branches capillary which are well distributed throughout Italy, with market shares of more than 13% in most Italian regions.<\/p>\n Furthermore, as shown in its published report, which is exhibited in an annex to the Complaint, the Complainant’s offers its services to approximately 13.9 million customers. Primarily based in Italy has a strong presence in Central-Eastern Europe with a network of approximately 900 branches and over 7,6 million customers, including corporate customers in 25 countries, in particular in the Mediterranean area, the United States, Russia, China and India.<\/p>\n The Complainant asserts that it has an established Internet presence with its main website at www. intesasanpaolo.com; and it holds and uses a large portfolio of domain name registrations including <intesasanpaolo.eu>, <intesasanpaolo.info>, <intesasanpaolo.biz>, <www.intesasanpaolo.net>, <intesasanpaolo.org> and <intesasanpaolo.in>.<\/p>\n Firstly, the Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name is identical, or confusingly similar, to the Complainant’s INTESA, and INTESA SANPAOLO trademarks and service marks.<\/p>\n The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name incorporates the trademarks INTESA, and INTESA SANPAOLO, with the mere addition of the term “websit”, which is a typosquatting version of the term “website”. It is argued that the additional term is highly confusing and misleading for Internet users, who might think that the disputed domain name is somehow connected to the Complainant and its official website or the various services offered by the Complainant to its customers on the web.<\/p>\n The Complainant secondly alleges that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name arguing that:<\/p>\n Thirdly the Complainant submits that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.<\/p>\n The Complainant adds that its trademarks INTESA and INTESA SANPAOLO are distinctive and well known all around the world; and the Complainant contends that the fact that the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name that is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s marks indicates that the Respondent had knowledge of the Complainant’s trademark at the time of registration of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n Furthermore, the Complainant argues that if the Respondent had carried even a basic Google search in respect of the wordings “INTESA SANPAOLO”, “INTESA” and “INTESA SANPAOLO WEBSIT”, the same would have yielded obvious references to the Complainant.<\/p>\n The Complainant adds that this argument is supported by an extract of a Google search, a screen capture of such search, which is exhibited in an annex to the Complaint; and that the use of the Complainant’s marks within the disputed domain name raises a clear inference of knowledge of the Complainant’s trademark on the part of the Respondent.<\/p>\n Therefore, the Complainant argues that it is more than likely that the disputed domain name would not have been registered if it did not incorporate the Complainant’s trademarks.<\/p>\n It is clear that the main purpose of the Respondent in registering the disputed domain name was to use it to create a website for “phishing” financial information in an attempt to defraud the Complainant’s customers.<\/p>\n The Complainant refers to a screen capture of the message generated when an attempt is made to reach the website to which the disputed domain name resolves. The screen capture, has been exhibited in an annex to the Complaint, shows that a warning message is generated. The Complainant submits that the website is currently blocked by Google Safe Browsing because of a suspected phishing activity.<\/p>\n The Complainant concludes, referring to4(b)(iv) of the Policy that, by using the disputed domain name, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to his web site, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of his web site.<\/p>\n The Complainant repeats that the disputed domain name is not used for any bone fide <\/em>offerings, considering that the same is connected to a website which has been blocked by Google Safe Browsing through a warning page.<\/p>\n Furthermore, the Complainant submits that on May 26, 2025, its attorneys sent to the Respondent a cease-and-desist letter, a copy of which is exhibited in an annex to the Complainant, asking for the voluntary transfer of the domain name at issue. Despite such communication, the Respondent did not comply with the above request.<\/p>\n The Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n The Respondent<\/span><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n No administratively compliant response has been filed.<\/span><\/span><\/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).<\/span><\/span><\/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).<\/span><\/span><\/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).<\/span><\/span><\/p>",
"procedural_factors": " 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": [
"James Bridgeman"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2025-10-29 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant, based in Italy, is a provider of banking and financial services using the INTESA SANPAULO trademark for which it holds:<\/p>\n <\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"INTESASANPAOLOWEBSIT.COM": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}\n
\n