The Complainant is an American company headquartered in Buffalo, New York. The Complainant was established in 1947 and focused on quality and craftsmanship to create authentic headwear and apparel, specializing in the wholesale distribution of men's and boy's apparel and furnishing, including includes sportswear, hosiery, underwear, nightwear, and work clothing. The Complainant creates premium lifestyle apparel for the US major sport leagues and for over 900 US colleges. In 2015, the Complainant entered into a partnership with the Liverpool Football Club and in 2023 it opened a pop-up store in London (UK). The Complainant's products can be purchased online, and the Complainant has an active presence on the most popular social networks, such as \"X\", \"Facebook\", \"Instagram\", and YouTube.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The disputed domain names were registered between February and October 2025. They all resolve to websites featuring the Complainant's '47 figurative mark prominently and allegedly offering the Complainant's goods for sale. The Complainant tried to contact the Respondent through the contact form available on the Registrar's website, notifying the infringement and requesting to cease any use of the disputed domain names and transfer them to the Complainant. However, the Complainant never received a reply. <\/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 names.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "
The Complainant contends that the requirements of the Policy have been met and that the disputed domain name should be transferred to it.<\/p>\n
As the disputed domain names are registered in the names of different individuals or entities, the Complainant requests that they be consolidated into a single UDRP dispute, as they are under common control. Consolidation would be procedurally efficient and fair to all parties. The disputed domain names have the same Registrant, Hosting Provider and top-level domain name (TLD) \".shop\". They were all registered between February and October 2025, and all resolved to websites with the same look and feel. Furthermore, the disputed domain names are built along the same pattern. Given these similarities, the Complainant submits that the disputed domain names are subject to a common control, justifying their consolidation in a single UDRP proceeding.<\/p>\n
The Complainant maintains that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant's marks. All the disputed domain names incorporate the Complainant's 47 mark together with the term \"brand\". The addition of generic terms, such as \"top\", \"club\", \"base\", \"home\", does not dispel the confusing similarity between the disputed domain names and the Complainant's marks, as the Complainant's mark remains clearly distinguishable within the disputed domain names. Furthermore, the top-level domain name “.shop” is merely instrumental to the use on the Internet.<\/p>\n
The Complainant contends that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names. There is no evidence to suggest that the Respondent holds any registered trademark rights relating to the disputed domain names. The Respondent registered the disputed domain several years after the ‘47 trademark became widely recognised. The Respondent is not a licensee or authorized agent of the Complainant, and has not been granted permission to use the Complainant’s trademarks. The Respondent is not an authorized reseller of the Complainant and has not been authorized to register or use the disputed domain names. Furthermore, based on the available information, the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain names, whether as an individual, business, or organisation, and his surname does not correspond to “47 BRAND” or the disputed domain names. The Respondent has not provided the Complainant with any evidence of use, or demonstrable preparations to use, the disputed domain names in connection with a bona fide <\/em>offering of goods or services prior to receiving notice of the dispute. The disputed domain names redirect to websites featuring the Complainant's marks and offering counterfeit goods for sale. The use of a domain name for illegal activity can never confer rights or legitimate interests on a Respondent.<\/p>\n Lastly, the Complainant asserts that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. Regarding bad faith registration, the Complainant notes that its trademark registrations date back several decades. The Complainant's mark is widely used in commerce across multiple platforms. Therefore, the Respondent could not have been unaware of the Complainant's mark when registering the disputed domain names. This circumstance is further demonstrated by the Respondent's use of the disputed domain names to sell replicas of the Complainant's products. The fact that replicas of the Complainant's products were offered for sale on the websites corresponding to the disputed domain names indicates that the Respondent was fully aware of the Complainant’s mark’s reputation and that the Respondent's purpose in registering the disputed domain names was to capitalise on this reputation by diverting Internet users seeking the Complainant's products to the Respondent's websites.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n With respect to use in bad faith, the Complainant argues that using the disputed domain names in connection with commercial websites where the Complainant’s trademarks are misappropriated and counterfeit products are offered for sale, clearly indicates that the Respondent registered the disputed domain names with the intention of capitalising on the Complainant's trademark reputation by diverting Internet users seeking the Complainant's products to the Respondent's websites for financial gain. The Complainant also notes that the websites associated with the disputed domain names do not contain a disclaimer informing potential customers of the lack of a relationship with the Complainant. Moreover, the Respondent failed to respond to the trademark infringement notifications sent by the Complainant. The Respondent has also previously been involved in other proceedings as a Respondent, where it was ordered to transfer the disputed domain names. In addition, the Complainant claims that the physical address provided by the Respondent appears to be non-existent. This should further support the Respondent's bad faith.<\/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>\n <\/p>",
"decision": "Accepted",
"panelists": [
"Angelica Lodigiani (Presiding Panelist)"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2025-12-31 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant is the owner of the following marks:<\/p>\n - '47 (figurative), International registration, No. 1306371 registered on May 20, 2016, for goods in classes 16, 18, 24 and 25;<\/p>\n - 47 FORTY SEVEN BRAND (figurative), US registration No. 5146899, registered on February 21, 2017, claiming first use in commerce since January 2015, for goods in class 25;<\/p>\n - 47, US registration, No. 4277350, registered on January 15, 2013, claiming first use in commerce since July 31, 2008, for goods in class 25.<\/p>\n The Complainant is also the owner of the domain names <47brand.com>, registered on October 16, 2009, <47brand.ca>, registered on December, 4, 2015, <47brand.co.jp>, registered on April, 8, 2025, and <47brand.mx>, registered on August, 20, 2018.<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"47brandbase.shop": "TRANSFERRED",
"top47brandhome.shop": "TRANSFERRED",
"47brandclub.shop": "TRANSFERRED",
"47brande.shop": "TRANSFERRED",
"47brandi.shop": "TRANSFERRED",
"47branda.shop": "TRANSFERRED",
"47brandh.shop": "TRANSFERRED"
}
}