Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions |
FDNY Fire Safety Education Fund, Inc. v.
Roger Miller
Claim Number: FA0302000145235
PARTIES
Complainant is FDNY Fire Safety Education Fund, Inc., New York, NY
(“Complainant”) represented by Lisa
Rosenburgh, of Salans. Respondent is Roger Miller,
Hawleyville, CT (“Respondent”) represented by Patrick W. Fletcher, of Fletcher Law Offices.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED
DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <fdny.biz>, registered with Register.Com.
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.
The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr.
(Ret.) is Panelist.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the
National Arbitration Forum (the “Forum”) electronically on February 11, 2003;
the Forum received
a hard copy of the Complaint on February 12, 2003.
On February 11, 2003, Register.Com
confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain name <fdny.biz> is registered with Register.Com and that the
Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Register.Com has verified that Respondent is bound by the Register.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 February 12, 2003, a Notification of
Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the “Commencement
Notification”),
setting a deadline of March 4, 2003 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@fdny.biz
by e-mail.
A timely Response was received and
determined to be complete on March 4, 2003.
Complainant’s additional submission was
timely received on March 10, 2003.
On March 19, 2003,
pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed the Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.)
as Panelist.
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from
Respondent to Complainant. However,
in the event the Panel finds that Respondent’s use and registration of the
domain name <fdny.biz> violates only the RDRP, Complainant requests cancellation of the
domain name registration.
PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS
A. Complainant
B. Respondent
Respondent, Roger Miller, concedes that
Complainant has established rights in the FDNY mark and that the <fdny.biz>
domain name is identical to Complainant’s mark.
Respondent contends that before any
notice of the present dispute, he made demonstrable preparations to use the <fdny.biz>
domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of services. Specifically, Respondent alleges that the
letters F, D, N and Y are the initials of the nicknames of Respondent and three
of his friends,
namely, Fuzzman, Discoman, Nobleman and Yodalman. Respondent claims that these individuals
have been commonly known by these names for more than twelve years. Respondent alleges that he registered the <fdny.biz>
domain name with the intent to direct the domain name to
<fdny.bigstep.com>, which resolves to a website where Respondent and
his
associates could exchange information.
Respondent argues that he has no intention to sell his rights in the <fdny.biz>
domain name to Complainant and maintains that he has never offered the
domain name registration for sale.
C. Additional Submissions
Complainant notes that Respondent
registered the <firemen.biz> domain name on the same date as the
registration for <fdny.biz> was effectuated. Complainant contends that this fact supports
Complainant’s allegation that Respondent registered the subject domain name in
order
to create an association between himself and the Fire Department of the
City of New York.
Complainant contends that Respondent’s
use and registration of the domain name <fdny.biz> violates the
.BIZ Registration Restrictions as he is not using the domain name for a
business or commercial use.
Respondent is the holder of several
domain names that violate the intellectual property rights of famous third
parties.
FINDINGS
Without
authorization, permission or license from Complainant, Respondent registered
the domain name <fdny.biz> with
Register.com on November 8, 2001. This
date is less than a month after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
when the tragic loss and heroic efforts of the FDNY
were detailed by the media
on a daily basis. Respondent also
is the owner of the domain name <firemen.biz>. Respondent registered this domain name on the same date that he
registered the domain name <fdny.biz>. Respondent registered the domain
name <fdny.biz> in order to create an association between himself
and the Fire Department of the City of New York.
Respondent claims that F, D, N, and Y are
the initials of the nicknames of Respondent, Roger Miller, and three of his friends:
Fuzzman, Discoman, Nobleman and Yodalman and that
these individuals have been commonly known by these names for more than 12
years. Respondent says that in November
of 2001, he registered the domain name <fdny.bigstep.com> with the
web-hosting company BIGSTEP
to provide a website where Respondent and his
aforementioned associates could keep in touch and relay information about their
day-to-day
lives and adventures.
Respondent claims to have registered the domain name <fdny.biz>
with
the intent to point said domain name to his <fdny.bigstep.com> website.
Respondent is also the registrant of the following domain
names: <mikebloomberg.biz>, <warrenbuffet.biz>,
<derekjeter.biz>,
and <joetorre.biz>, among others.
DISCUSSION
Paragraph 15(a) of
the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (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.”
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.
Complainant, FDNY Fire Safety Education
Fund, is a non-profit corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of
the State
of New York. The Fire
Department of the City of New York, commonly known as FDNY, was established in
1898 and has continuously used the FDNY Marks
to identify its services for over
a century. The City of New York has
granted it the right to use and license the FDNY Marks. See British Broad.
Corp. v. Renteria, D2000-0050 (WIPO Mar. 23, 2000) (noting that the Policy
“does not distinguish between registered and unregistered trademarks and
service marks in the context of abusive registration of domain names” and
applying the Policy to “unregistered trademarks and service
marks”); see
also Great Plains Metromall, LLC v.
Creach, FA 97044 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 18, 2001) (finding that the Uniform
Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy does not require “that a
trademark be
registered by a governmental authority for such rights to exist”); see also Tuxedos By Rose v. Nunez, FA 95248 (Nat.
Arb. Forum Aug. 17, 2000) (finding common law rights in a mark where its use
was continuous and ongoing, and secondary
meaning was established).
Although
the FDNY holds U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Reg. No. 2,606,740 for the FDNY
mark, the registration was not effected until
August 13, 2002 (nine months
after Respondent’s <fdny.biz> domain name was registered).
However, the FDNY’s successful registration of its mark on the Principal
Register is evidence of its
rights in the mark.
Respondent’s
<fdny.biz> domain name is identical to Complainant’s FDNY
Mark. The addition of the top-level domain
.biz extension to the FDNY Mark does not alter the fact that the domain name is
identical for
the purposes of the Policy. See Snow Fun, Inc. v. O'Connor, FA 96578 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 8, 2001)
(finding that the domain name <termquote.com> is identical to
Complainant’s TERMQUOTE
mark); see also Rollerblade, Inc. v. McCrady, D2000-0429 (WIPO June 25, 2000)
(finding that the top-level of the domain name such as “.net” or “.com” does
not affect the domain
name for the purpose of determining whether it is identical
or confusingly similar).
The Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) has
been satisfied.
Complainant has not given Respondent any
rights or legitimate interests in the FDNY Mark by way of express or implied
authorization. Further, because the
FDNY Mark is distinct and identifies a particular source, Respondent is not
commonly known by the “fdny” second-level
domain. 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 and
never applied for a license
or permission from Complainant to use the trademarked name); 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); see also Broadcom
Corp. v. Intellifone Corp., FA 96356 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 5, 2001)
(finding no rights or legitimate interests because Respondent is not commonly
known by
the disputed domain name or using the domain name in connection with a
legitimate or fair use).
Respondent contends that F,
D, N, and Y are the initials of the nicknames of Respondent (Roger Miller) and
three of his friends: Fuzzman, Discoman, Nobleman and
Yodalman, and that said individuals have been commonly known by these names for
more than 12 years.
However, if
true, this allegation only shows that Respondent and his three friends are
commonly known as Fuzzman, Discoman, Nobleman,
and Yodalman, and not the
acronym FDNY. Therefore, Respondent,
Roger Miller, is not commonly known as FDNY.
See America Online, Inc. v. Kenny Anderson, FA103365 (Nat. Arb.
Forum February 2, 2002) (although Respondent may have been known as Anderson,
O’Brien & Levy, Inc., there
is no evidence presented that it has been
commonly known as the acronym AOL”).
Respondent does not currently operate a
website in connection with the <fdny.biz> domain name; thus,
Respondent’s inaction permits the inference that it lacks rights and legitimate
interests in the domain name. Because
Respondent registered the subject domain name on November 8, 2001, a sufficient
amount of time has elapsed to determine that
Respondent is passively holding
the domain name, which indicates a lack of rights in the domain name. See BMW AG v. Loophole, D2000-1156 (WIPO
Oct. 26, 2000) (finding no rights in the domain name where Respondent claimed
to be using the domain name for a
noncommercial purpose but had made no actual
use of the domain name); see also CBS
Broad., Inc. v. LA-Twilight-Zone, D2000-0397 (WIPO June 19, 2000) (finding
that Respondent failed to demonstrate any rights or legitimate interests in the
<twilight-zone.net>
domain name since Complainant had been using the
TWILIGHT ZONE mark since 1959).
Respondent has
passively held the domain name since the November 8, 2001 registration.
Respondent’s passive holding constitutes bad
faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See
DCI
S.A. v. Link Commercial Corp.,
D2000-1232 (WIPO Dec. 7, 2000) (concluding that Respondent’s passive holding of
the domain name satisfies the requirement of ¶
4(a)(iii) of the Policy); see
also Clerical Med. Inv. Group Ltd. v.
Clericalmedical.com, D2000-1228 (WIPO Nov. 28, 2000) (finding that merely
holding an infringing domain name without active use can constitute use in
bad
faith); see also Caravan Club v.
Mrgsale, FA 95314 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 30, 2000) (finding that Respondent
made no use of the domain name or website that connects with the
domain name,
and that passive holding of a domain name permits an inference of registration
and use in bad faith); see also E.
& J. Gallo Winery v. Oak Inv. Group, D2000-1213 (WIPO Nov. 12, 2000)
(finding bad faith where (1) Respondent knew or should have known of Complainant’s
famous GALLO
marks and (2) Respondent made no use of the domain name
<winegallo.com>).
Respondent had knowledge of the FDNY
trademark when he registered the domain name in dispute. Respondent’s registration of the domain
name, despite knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the mark, indicates bad
faith registration
under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See Digi Int’l v. DDI Sys.,
FA 124506 (Nat. Arb. Forum Oct. 24, 2002) (holding that “there is a legal
presumption of bad faith, when Respondent reasonably should
have been aware of
Complainant’s trademarks, actually or constructively”); see also
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).
Respondent’s
violation of the .BIZ Registration Restrictions, by registering the domain name
<fdny.biz> for noncommercial purposes, is evidence of bad
faith. See Bayer Aktiengesellschaft
v. Dangoz & Partners, D2002-1115 (WIPO February 3, 2003). (“[T]he voluntary breach of the registrar’s
Domain Name Services Agreement is evidence of bad faith”).
Respondent is the holder of several
domain names that violate the intellectual property rights of famous third
parties. Respondent’s pattern of
registering infringing domain names while preventing them from reflecting their
marks in a domain name constitutes
bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii). See
Harcourt, Inc. v. Fadness, FA
95247 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 8, 2000) (finding that one instance of
registration of several infringing domain names satisfies
the burden imposed by
the Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii)); see also Armstrong
Holdings, Inc. v. JAZ Assoc., FA 95234 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 17, 2000)
(finding that the Respondent violated Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii) by registering multiple
domain
names that infringe upon others’ famous and registered trademarks).
The Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii) has been satisfied.
DECISION
Having
established all three elements required under ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes
that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <fdny.biz>
domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr.
(Ret.), Panelist
Dated: March 26, 2003
WorldLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/GENDND/2003/299.html