Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions |
DECISION
Conwest
Resources, Inc. v. Erotica
Claim
Number: FA0203000105955
PARTIES
Complainant is Conwest Resources, Inc., San
Francisco, CA (“Complainant”).
Respondent is Erotica,
Hamburg, GERMANY (“Respondent”).
REGISTRAR
AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at
issue is <falconpump.com>,
registered with Tucows, 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 Panelist in this proceeding.
Judge Ralph Yachnin as
Panelist.
PROCEDURAL
HISTORY
Complainant submitted
a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the “Forum”) electronically on
March 20, 2002; the Forum received
a hard copy of the Complaint on March 20,
2002.
On March 20, 2002,
Tucows, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain name <falconpump.com> is registered
with Tucows, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the
name. Tucows, Inc. has verified that
Respondent is bound by the Tucows, Inc. 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 March 26, 2002, a
Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the
“Commencement Notification”), setting
a deadline of April 15, 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@falconpump.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 April 22, 2002,
pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a
single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Judge
Ralph Yachnin 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
1. The disputed domain
name <falconpump.com> is
confusingly similar to Complainant’s FALCON mark.
2. The original owner
of the registration of the disputed domain name purportedly transferred it to
current Respondent, yet the original
owner and Respondent have the same e-mail
addresses. This activity by Respondent
impedes Complainant’s ability to enforce its rights and is evidence that
Respondent does not have legitimate
rights to the disputed domain name.
3. Respondent has used
a confusingly similar domain name to intentionally attempt to attract, for
commercial gain, Internet users
to Respondent’s website, by creating a
likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s FALCON mark as to the source,
sponsorship, affiliation,
or endorsements of Respondent’s website. Therefore, Respondent has registered and
used the disputed domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent
No Response was
submitted.
FINDINGS
Complainant
owns two Federal Registrations of the FALCON mark (Reg. Nos. 1,986,918 and
1,991,036, registered on July 16, 1996 and
August 6, 1996 respectively). As early as 1977, Complainant and
predecessor-in-interest adopted and began using the FALCON mark in connection
with gay-themed adult
motion pictures and related merchandise. Complainant owns the registrations of more
than fifty domain names that incorporate the FALCON mark, including
<falconstudios.com>. Since March
1997, Complainant has been the exclusive worldwide licensee authorized to use
the FALCON mark in connection with penis
enlargement pumps.
Respondent
registered <falconpump.com> on
February 29, 2000. Respondendent uses
the website connected with the disputed domain name to sell penis enlargement
pumps that compete directly with
Complainant’s business. Prior to transferring the disputed domain
name registration to Respondent, the original administration contact “T. Black”
informed
Complainant that it had “offers from other companies to sell this
domain name and I may do just sell my domain.”
Before the transfer, T. Black’s e-mail was “service@drjoelpumps.com” and
Respondent is currently the registrant of <drjoelpumps.com>
and currently
uses “service@drjoelpumps.com.”
Therefore, upon information and belief, Complainant asserts that
Respondent and T. Black are one and the same.
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 the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark
or service mark in which the Complainant
has rights; and
(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 established its rights to the FALCON mark through registration with the
United States Patent and Trademark Office
and subsequent continuous use. Even though Complainant’s mark is not
registered in Respondent’s country, the fact that it is registered with the
USPTO satisfies
the requirement necessary for Complainant to establish its
rights to the FALCON mark. See Koninklijke KPN N.V. v. Telepathy Inc.,
D2001-0217 (WIPO May 7, 2001) (finding that the Policy does not require that
the mark be registered in the country in which a Respondent
operates. It is sufficient that a Complainant can
demonstrate a mark in some jurisdiction).
The
disputed domain name <falconpump.com>
is confusingly similar to
Complainant’s FALCON mark. The
disputed domain name incorporates Complainant’s mark in its entirety and merely
adds the generic term “pump.” This
minor change does not change the overall impression of the disputed domain name
and therefore, the disputed domain name and Complainant’s
mark are confusingly
similar. See Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil, D2000-1409 (WIPO Dec. 9,
2000) (finding that “[n]either the addition of an ordinary descriptive word…nor
the suffix ‘.com’ detract
from the overall impression of the dominant part of
the name in each case, namely the trademark SONY” and thus Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) is
satisfied); see also Arthur Guinness Son
& Co. (Dublin) Ltd. v. Healy/BOSTH,
D2001-0026 (WIPO Mar. 23, 2001) (finding confusing similarity where the domain
name in dispute contains the identical mark of the
Complainant combined with a
generic word or term). The disputed
domain name <falconpump.com> is
even more confusingly similar when it is considered that Complainant’s mark is
associated with the term “pump.” See Space Imaging LLC v. Brownwell,
AF-0298 (eResolution Sept. 22, 2000) (finding confusing similarity where the
Respondent’s domain name combines the Complainant’s
mark with a generic term
that has an obvious relationship to the Complainant’s business); see also Marriott Int’l v. Café au lait,
FA 93670, (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 13, 2000) (finding that the Respondent’s domain
name <marriott-hotel.com> is confusingly similar
to Complainant’s
MARRIOTT mark)
The
Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) has been satisfied.
Rights
or Legitimate Interests
Respondent
has not filed a Response. Thus, the
Panel may conclude that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in <falconpump.com>. 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).
Since a Response was not filed, the Panel will presume that all
allegations in the Complaint are true. See Desotec N.V. v. Jacobi Carbons AB,
D2000-1398 (WIPO Dec. 21, 2000) (finding that failing to respond allows a
presumption that Complainant’s allegations are true unless
clearly contradicted
by the evidence).
Respondent
uses the confusingly similar domain name in connection with a website that
offers competing goods and services.
This activity by Respondent is not considered a bona fide use pursuant
to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i). See Chip Merchant, Inc. v. Blue Star Elec.,
D2000-0474 (WIPO Aug. 21, 2000) (finding that the disputed domain names were
confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark and that
Respondent’s use of the
domain names to sell competing goods was illegitimate and not a bona fide
offering of goods); see also Ticketmaster
Corp. v. DiscoverNet, Inc., D2001-0252 (WIPO Apr. 9, 2001) (finding no
rights or legitimate interests where Respondent generated commercial gain by
intentionally
and misleadingly diverting users away from Complainant's site to
a competing website).
The
only evidence presented describes Respondent as “T. Black,” “drjoelpumps.com,”
and “Erotica.” Since Respondent has not
presented any evidence that it is commonly known as <falconpump.com>, Respondent has failed to satisfy 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).
Respondent’s
use of a confusingly similar domain name that is connected with a website that
offers competing products and services
is not a legitimate noncommercial or
fair use of <falconpump.com>
pursuant to Polcy ¶ 4(c)(iii). See Kosmea Pty Ltd. v. Krpan, D2000-0948
(WIPO Oct. 3, 2000) (finding no rights in the domain name where Respondent has
an intention to divert consumers of Complainant’s
products to Respondent’s site
by using Complainant’s mark); see also
Caterpillar Inc. v. Quin, D2000-0314 (WIPO June 12, 2000) (finding that
Respondent does not have a legitimate interest in using the domain names
<caterpillarparts.com>
and <caterpillarspares.com> to suggest a
connection or relationship, which does not exist, with Complainant's mark
CATERPILLAR).
The
Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii) has been satisfied.
Registration
and Use in Bad Faith
Respondent
registered a confusingly similar domain name that incorporates Complainant’s
FALCON mark in its entirety and adds the generic
term “pump,” a term that is
associated with Complainant’s products.
Because Respondent uses the disputed domain name to promote competing
products and services, the Panel may infer that Respondent knew
that the
disputed domain name would cause confusion.
Therefore, Respondent registered the disputed domain name in bad faith. 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").
Respondent
has used the disputed domain name to intentionally attempt to attract, for
commercial gain, Internet users to Respondent’s
website, by creating a
likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s FALCON mark as to the source,
sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsements
of Respondent’s website. Therefore, Respondent has used the disputed
domain name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See TM
Acquisition Corp. v. Carroll, FA 97035 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 14, 2001)
(finding bad faith where Respondent used the domain name, for commercial gain,
to intentionally
attract users to a direct competitor of Complainant); see also
Fossil Inc. v. NAS, FA 92525 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 23, 2000) (finding that
the Respondent acted in bad faith by registering the domain name
<fossilwatch.com>
and using it to sell various watch brands).
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 should be hereby
granted.
Accordingly,
it is Ordered that the <falconpump.com>
domain name be transferred from
Respondent to Complainant.
Hon.
Ralph Yachnin, Panelist
Justice,
Supreme Court, NY (Ret.)
Dated:
April 29, 2002
WorldLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/GENDND/2002/629.html