The Complainant informs that KSB SE & Co. KGaA is a leading supplier of pumps, valves and related systems for building services, industry and water transport, waste-water treatment and power plant processes. Founded in Frankenthal, Germany, in 1871, the sign KSB is the acronym of the founders’ surnames: Johannes Klein, Friedrich Schanzlin and Jakob Becker. Today, the company has a presence on all continents with its own sales and marketing organizations, manufacturing facilities and service operations. With sales revenue running over 2.965,00 billion euros in 2024, the KSB Group is one of the leading suppliers of pumps, valves and related service worldwide. Nowadays, KSB employs more than 16,000 people with more than 190 service centers and around 3,500 service specialists. The Complainant's main manufacturing facilities have been located in Germany since 1951. Europe is the main market. The second-largest market is the Region Asia \/ Pacific, followed by the Region Americas and the Region Middle East \/ Africa. Outside Europe, KSB’s biggest production sites are in Brazil, China, India and the USA.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The Complainant is the owner of the trademark KSB, with several international and national trademark registrations worldwide.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
In order to protect and promote its trademark KSB on the Internet, Complainant registered various domain names consisting of or comprising the word “KSB” under several different TLDs.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The official website https:\/\/www.ksb.com\/, generates a significant number of visits by Internet users. The Complainant is also active on the main social media, like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and LinkedIn.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain name <ksbfrance.com> was registered on August 12, 2025.<\/span><\/p>\n According to the Complainant the disputed domain name is highly similar to the \"KSB\" trademark since the mere addition of the geographical indicator “france”, i.e. one of the countries where the Complainant is currently operating, to the trademark KSB does not avoid consumers to recognize the renown “KSB” trademark nor exclude the impression that the disputed domain name, and corresponding website, might be operated by the Complainant or with the Complainant’s authorization.<\/span><\/p>\n Furthermore, the Complainant informs that the Respondent was never authorized, in any manner, by the Complainant to use its trademark \"KSB\".<\/p>\n <\/p>\n In addition, the Complainant notes that the disputed domain name was redirected by the Respondent to a pay-per-click website where users are redirected to third-party website offering for sale products under the brands “DANFOSS”, “OMFB” and ”STAUFF”, in competition with the Complainant and in an attempt to deceive users looking for the Complainant and its products. This use, in the Complainant's view, can not be considered either a bona fide offering of goods or services nor a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the disputed Domain Name. On the contrary, according to the Complainant, such use of the disputed domain name clearly demonstrates that the sole purpose of the Respondent is to disrupt the Complainant's normal business and create confusion with the Complainant’s name or mark to mislead the public with the intent to exploit, for commercial gain, Internet traffic destined for the Complainant.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The Complainant also observes that Respondent is profiting from the strong renown of the Complainant's trademark for its sole economic advantage through offering the disputed domain name for sale on the Sedo.com platform for an amount, i.e. 198 €, which exceeds any reasonable\/documentable out-of-pocket costs directly associated with the registration and maintenance of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Additionally, the Complainant points out that a cease and desist letter was sent to the Respondent (even if there is no trace of this letter in the records) and a notification to the Registrar was also sent in order to request the suspension of the disputed domain name due to the unfair practices and trademark infringement. The Complainant notes that in both cases the Respondent never reacts and believes that said lack of reaction is additional evidence of bad faith.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Finally, with reference to the most particular aspect of the present case, the Complainant notes that the disputed domain name has been registered by a third unauthorized party with the aim of passing off as the Complainant through using the “KSB” name as Registrant organization denomination as well as the “Bruno Monjoint” Registrant name and “bruno.monjoint@mail.com”as Registrant email which is particularly relevant since Mr. Bruno Monjoint is the President of KSB France.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n On November 4, 2025, the Complainant, after CAC has correctly notified the complaint to the physical address revealed by the Verification, has sent an additional notice explaining that the Complainant's French subsidiary had received the complaint and had decided not to participate in the proceedings since it was not the genuine owner of the disputed domain name.<\/p>\n <\/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´s contentions are summarised above.<\/p>\n 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": [
"Guido Maffei"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2025-11-21 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant is the owner of the trademark \"KSB\" which is registered in numerous countries all over the world, including France. In particular, KSB SE & Co. KGaA owns:<\/p>\n
No administratively compliant Response has been filed.<\/p>",
"rights": "\n