Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions |
American Suzuki Motor Corp. v. RaveClub
Berlin
Claim Number: FA0209000124497
PARTIES
Complainant
is American Suzuki Motor Corp.,
Brea, CA (“Complainant”). Respondent is RaveClub Berlin, Cherry Hill, NJ (“Respondent”).
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The
domain name at issue is <suzukicycle.com>,
registered with Joker.com.
PANEL
The
undersigned certifies that she has acted independently and impartially and to
the best of her knowledge has no known conflict
in serving as Panelist in this
proceeding.
Sandra
Franklin as Panelist.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant
submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the “Forum”)
electronically on August 30, 2002; the Forum received
a hard copy of the
Complaint on September 3, 2002.
On
September 3, 2002, Joker.com confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain
name <suzukicycle.com> is
registered with Joker.com and that Respondent is the current registrant of the
name. Joker.com has verified that
Respondent is bound by the Joker.com 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
September 3, 2002, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of
Administrative Proceeding (the “Commencement Notification”),
setting a deadline
of September 23, 2002 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@suzukicycle.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
October 8, 2002, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided
by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Sandra
Franklin 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 Respondent.
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant
requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS
A.
Complainant
The
<suzukicycle.com>
domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's SUZUKI mark.
Respondent
has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.
Respondent registered and used the
disputed domain name in bad faith.
B.
Respondent
Respondent
did not submit a Response.
FINDINGS
Complainant has registered its SUZUKI
mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office as Registration Number
910,353. Complainant uses the mark in
relation to motorcycles, and it is recognized internationally. Complainant holds the registration for
<suzukicycles.com> and uses the domain name for advertising and marketing
purposes.
Respondent registered the disputed domain
name <suzukicycle.com> on September 10, 2001. Respondent is using the disputed domain name
to redirect Internet users to a pornographic website. Respondent (RaveClub Berlin) is the alter ego of the well-known
cybersquatter John Zuccarini, who has been the Respondent in numerous
domain
name disputes involving infringing domain names.
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 and
draw such inferences it considers appropriate
pursuant to paragraph 14(b) 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 Respondent
is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which
Complainant has
rights; and
(2)
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 established that it has
rights in the SUZUKI mark through registration with the United States Patent
and Trademark
Office and continuous use.
Respondent’s <suzukicycle.com>
domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark because SUZUKI is the
dominant element of the domain name and the additional
word “cycle” is
descriptive of Complainant’s business of manufacturing and selling
motorcycles. The addition of a term
that describes Complainant‘s business does not create a distinct domain name
capable of overcoming a claim
of confusing similarity. See Space
Imaging LLC v. Brownwell, AF-0298
(eResolution Sept. 22, 2000) (finding confusing similarity where Respondent’s
domain name combines Complainant’s mark with
a generic term that has an obvious
relationship to Complainant’s business); see also Brown
& Bigelow, Inc. v. Rodela, FA 96466 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 5,
2001) (finding that the <hoylecasino.net> domain name is confusingly
similar to Complainant’s
HOYLE mark, and that the addition of “casino,” a
generic word describing the type of business in which Complainant is engaged,
does
not take the disputed domain name out of the realm of confusing
similarity).
The
Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) has been satisfied.
Rights or Legitimate Interests
Respondent has failed to come forward
with a Response. Therefore, it is
presumed that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed
domain name. See Pavillion Agency, Inc. v. Greenhouse Agency
Ltd., D2000-1221 (WIPO Dec. 4, 2000) (finding that Respondents’ failure to
respond can be construed as an admission that they have no
legitimate interest
in the domain names).
Furthermore, when Respondent fails to
submit a Response the Panel is permitted to make all inferences in favor of
Complainant. See Talk City, Inc.
v. Robertson, D2000-0009, (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000)
(“In the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all
allegations of the Complaint”).
Respondent is using a confusingly similar
domain name in order to divert Internet users to a pornographic website. The use of a domain name, confusingly
similar to Complainant’s mark, in relation to an adult-orientated website is
not considered
to be connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services
pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i), or a legitimate, noncommercial or fair
use
pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). See Brown & Bigelow, Inc. v. Rodela, FA
96466 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 5, 2001) (finding that infringing on another's
well-known mark to provide a link to a pornographic
site is not a legitimate or
fair use); see also MatchNet plc. v. MAC Trading,
D2000-0205 (WIPO May 11, 2000) (finding that it is not a bona fide offering of
goods or services to use a domain name for commercial
gain by attracting
Internet users to third party sites offering sexually explicit and pornographic
material where such use is calculated
to mislead consumers and to tarnish
Complainant’s mark).
Respondent is known as RaveClub Berlin
and John Zuccarini, but there is no evidence on record that Respondent is
commonly known as
SUZUKI, SUZUKI CYCLE or <suzukicycle.com>. Respondent has come forward with no
evidence, therefore it has failed to establish that it has rights or legitimate
interests in the
disputed domain name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). See Gallup Inc. v. Amish Country Store, FA 96209 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan.
23, 2001) (finding that Respondent does not have rights in a domain name when
Respondent is not known
by the mark); see also Charles Jourdan Holding AG v. AAIM,
D2000-0403 (WIPO June 27, 2000) (finding no rights or legitimate interests
where (1) Respondent is not a licensee of Complainant;
(2) Complainant’s prior
rights in the domain name precede Respondent’s registration; (3) Respondent is
not commonly known by the
domain name in question).
The Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii)
has been satisfied.
Registration and Use in Bad Faith
Respondent is using a domain name that is
confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark in order to create a likelihood of
confusion for
Respondent’s own commercial gain. Furthermore, Respondent is diverting Internet users to a
pornographic website, which tarnishes Complainant’s good will. Respondent’s behavior is considered to be
evidence of bad faith use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See MatchNet plc. v. MAC Trading, D2000-0205 (WIPO May 11, 2000)
(finding that the association of a confusingly similar domain name with a
pornographic website can
constitute bad faith); see also Ty, Inc. v. O.Z. Names, D2000-0370 (WIPO
June 27, 2000) (finding that absent contrary evidence, linking the domain names
in question to graphic, adult-oriented
websites is evidence of bad faith).
Furthermore, based on the well-known
nature of Complainant’s SUZUKI mark it can be inferred that Respondent had
actual knowledge of
Complainant’s rights in the mark when it registered the
infringing domain name <suzukicycle.com>. Registration of an infringing domain name,
despite knowledge of Complainant’s rights is evidence of bad faith registration
pursuant
to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See
Entrepreneur Media, Inc. v. Smith, [2002] USCA9 115; 279 F.3d 1135, 1148 (9th Cir. Feb.
11, 2002) (finding that "[w]here an alleged infringer chooses a mark he
knows to be similar to another, one can
infer an intent to confuse"); see
also Samsonite Corp. v. Colony
Holding, FA 94313 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 17, 2000) (finding that evidence of
bad faith includes actual or constructive knowledge of a commonly
known mark at
the time of registration).
The Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii)
has been satisfied.
DECISION
Having established all three elements
required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that the requested relief
shall be hereby
GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the
domain name <suzukicycle.com>
be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Sandra Franklin, Panelist
Dated: October 18, 2002
WorldLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/GENDND/2002/1455.html