Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions |
DECISION
Calvin Klein, Inc. v. Sufir Scelomo
Claim Number: FA0012000096314
PARTIES
The Complainant is Calvin Klein, Inc., New York, NY, USA ("Complainant") represented by Paul Rawlinson, of Baker & McKenzie. The Respondent is Sufir Scelomo, Roma, Italia, IT ("Respondent").
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is "e-calvinklein.com" registered with Network Solutions, Inc.
PANEL
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge, has no known conflict in serving as a panelist in this proceeding.
John J. Upchurch as Panelist.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum") electronically on December 21, 2000; the Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on December 28, 2000.
On January 3, 2001, Network Solutions, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain name "e-calvinklein.com" is registered with Network Solutions, Inc. and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Network Solutions, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Network Solutions, Inc. 5.0 registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").
On January 5, 2001, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of January 25, 2001 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts, and to postmaster@e-calvinklein.com by e-mail.
Having received no Response from Respondent, using the same contact details and methods as were used for the Commencement Notification, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On February 2, 2001, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a One Member panel, the Forum appointed John J. Upchurch as Panelist.
Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent." Therefore, the Panel may issue its Decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the Forum’s Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any Response from the Respondent.
RELIEF SOUGHT
The Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.
PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS
A. Complainant
(a) The domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;
(b) The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(c) The domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith by the Respondent.
B. Respondent
Respondent submitted no response in this UDRP proceeding.
FINDINGS
Complainant is the world famous fashion, clothing, and accessories retailer and has acquired a very substantial reputation in Italy and worldwide in its "Calvin Klein" and "cK Calvin Klein" marks.
Complainant is the registered proprietor of a number of trademarks around the world for many different kinds of products including, relevant to this dispute, Italian trademark registration No. 346124 for "CALVIN KLEIN" (registered 18 March 1985 in classes 3,9,14,18,24 and 25) and No. 675,586 (registered 12 April 1996 in class 25) for "CK/CALVIN KLEIN." In addition to the Italian trademarks, Complainant is the registered proprietor of equivalent trademark registrations in the USA and worldwide.
Respondent registered the domain name in question on March 25, 1999, although Complainant first became aware of the infringing domain name in June 2000.
The site that has been posted under this domain name has the message "Sito in allestimo," which is Italian for "site under construction."
Complainant’s representative sent Respondent a letter on July 7, 2000 asking that the domain name be withdrawn from the Internet. Complainant never received a response to this letter.
DISCUSSION
Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable."
In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of the Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules.
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that the Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:
(1) the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;
(2) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
Identical and/or Confusingly Similar
Complainant has rights in the CALVIN KLEIN mark given its numerous trademark registrations in countries across the world.
Respondent has registered a domain name which adds the single letter "e" and a hyphen to Complainant’s registered mark. The addition of the letter "e" and hyphen does not dilute the similarity between Complainant’s mark and the domain name. Prior UDRP decisions reveal comparable holdings when such a domain name is registered. See Crédit Lyonnais v. Association Etre Ensemble, D2000-1426 (WIPO Dec. 7, 2000) (finding that the addition of the letter "e" and a hyphen does not affect the power of the mark in determining confusing similarity); Canadian Tire Corp. v. 849075 Alberta Ltd., D2000-0985 (WIPO Oct. 19, 2000) (finding that the domain names "ecanadiantire.com" and "e-canadiantire.com" are confusingly similar to Canadian Tire’s trademarks).
Accordingly, Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) is satisfied.
Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests under Policy ¶ 4(c) for the following reasons:
(a) The Respondent is not and has never been known by the domain name, nor has there been any trade mark registration for "Calvin Klein" or any other similar name by the Respondent. Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii).
(b) The Respondent is not a licensee of the Complainant, nor is the Respondent otherwise authorised to use the Complainant’s marks. See Compagnie de Saint Gobain v. Com-Union Corp., D2000-0020 (WIPO Mar. 14, 2000) (finding no rights or legitimate interest where Respondent was not commonly known by the mark or never applied for a license or permission from the Complainant to use the trademarked name).
(c) The domain name was not registered until after the Complainant had obtained and used its trademarks for a significant period of time. Since the domain name resolves to a website that is under construction and the Respondent has not submitted a statement indicating preparations to use the domain name, the Panel concludes that the Respondent has not used the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or for a legitimate or fair non-commercial use as of the date of the filing of this Complaint. Policy ¶ 4(c)(i), (iii). See Adamovske Strojirny v. Tatu Rautiainen, D2000-1394 (WIPO Dec. 20, 2000) (finding that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name where the Respondent is not commonly known by the distinct ADAST mark and has made no use of the domain name in question).
Accordingly, Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii) is satisfied.
Registration and Use in Bad Faith
The domain name in question is obviously connected with Complainant’s famous business. Registration of such a domain name by someone with no connection with Complainant is evidence of opportunistic bad faith. See America Online, Inc. v. Xianfeng Fu, D2000-1374 (WIPO Dec. 11, 2000) (finding that ICQ mark is so obviously connected with the Complainant and its products that the use of the domain names by the Respondent, who has no connection with the Complainant, suggests opportunistic bad faith). In addition, Respondent’s failure to use the website further reveals opportunistic bad faith. See Alitalia –Linee Aeree Italiane S.p.A v. Colour Digital, D2000-1260 (WIPO Nov. 23, 2000) (finding bad faith where the Respondent made no use of the domain name in question and there are no other indications that the Respondent could have registered and used the domain name in question for any non-infringing purpose).
The Respondent has a history of registering domain names that infringe trademarks owned by others, including <e-adidas.com>, <e-watchstore.com>, <swatchonline.com>, <e-swatch.com>, and <swatchshop.com>. This in itself is evidence of bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii). See Australian Stock Exch. v. Community Internet (Australia), D2000-1384 (WIPO Nov. 30, 2000) (finding bad faith under Policy paragraph 4(b)(ii) where Respondent registered multiple infringing domain names containing the trademarks or service marks of other widely known Australian businesses).
Accordingly, Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii) is satisfied.
DECISION
Having established all three elements required by the ICANN Policy Rule 4(a), it is the decision of the panel that the requested relief be granted.
Accordingly, for all of the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that the domain name, "e-calvinklein.com" be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.
Honorable John J. Upchurch
Retired Judge
Arbitrator
Dated: February 16, 2001
WorldLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/GENDND/2001/334.html