Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions |
TM Acquisition Corp. v. Internet and Mail
Order Marketing
Claim Number: FA0307000169053
Complainant is TM Acquisition Corp., Las Vegas, NV
(“Complainant”) represented by Kathryn
S. Geib. Respondent is Internet and
Mail Order Marketing, Costa Mesa, CA (“Respondent”).
REGISTRAR
AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The
domain name at issue is <century21homesforsale.com> registered
with Dotster.
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.
Hon.
Ralph Yachnin as Panelist.
Complainant
submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum")
electronically on July 15, 2003; the Forum
received a hard copy of the
Complaint on July 16, 2003.
On
July 15, 2003, Dotster confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain name <century21homesforsale.com>
is registered with Dotster and that Respondent is the current registrant of the
name. Dotster has verified that Respondent is bound
by the Dotster 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
July 16, 2003, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative
Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"),
setting a deadline of
August 5, 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@century21homesforsale.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
August 7, 2003, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided
by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Hon.
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.
Complainant
requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant makes the following assertions:
1. Respondent’s <century21homesforsale.com>
domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s CENTURY 21 mark.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or
legitimate interests in the <century21homesforsale.com> domain
name.
3. Respondent registered and used the <century21homesforsale.com>
domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in
this proceeding.
Complainant
holds several trademark registrations with the United States Patent and
Trademark Office (“USPTO”) for the CENTURY 21
mark, including Reg. No.
1,063,488 (registered on April 12, 1977) related to real estate brokerage
services. Complainant also holds
trademark registrations in a number of
countries outside of the U.S. Complainant operates its principal website at the
<century21.com>
domain name where Internet users may buy, sell or finance
real estate property.
Respondent
registered the <century21homesforsale.com> domain name on April
27, 2002. Respondent is using the disputed domain name to provide real estate
services that are the same as
those services offered by Complainant.
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 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 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.
Complainant has
established that it has rights in the CENTURY 21 mark through registration with
the USPTO and continuous use in commerce
since April 16, 1972.
Respondent’s <century21homesforsale.com>
domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s CENTURY 21 mark because the
disputed domain name appropriates Complainant’s entire
mark and merely adds the
generic terms “homes,” “for” and “sale” to the end of the mark. The addition of
generic terms to Complainant’s
famous mark does not significantly distinguish
Respondent’s domain name from the mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). The fact that
the generic
terms Respondent has added to Complainant’s mark are directly
related to Complainant’s real estate services exacerbates the confusing
similarity between the <century21homesforsale.com> domain name and
the CENTURY 21 mark. See
Caterpillar Inc. v. Quin, D2000-0314 (WIPO June 12, 2000) (finding that the
disputed domain names <caterpillarparts.com> and
<caterpillarspares.com>
were confusingly similar to the registered
trademarks CATERPILLAR and CATERPILLER DESIGN because “the idea suggested by
the disputed
domain names and the trademarks was that the goods and services
offered in association with the domain name are manufactured by or
sold by the
Complainant or one of the Complainant’s approved distributors. The disputed
trademarks contain one distinct component,
the word Caterpillar”); see also Marriott Int’l v. Café au lait, FA
93670, (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 13, 2000) (finding that Respondent’s domain name
<marriott-hotel.com> is confusingly similar
to Complainant’s MARRIOTT
mark).
Accordingly, the
Panel finds that Complainant has established Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).
Respondent has
neglected to favor the Panel with a Response in this proceeding. Thus, the
Panel accepts all reasonable allegations
and inferences contained in the
Complaint as true. See Do the Hustle, LLC v. Tropic Web, D2000-0624
(WIPO Aug. 21, 2000) (“Failure of a respondent to come forward to [contest
complainant’s allegations] is tantamount to
admitting the truth of
complainant’s assertion in this regard”); see also 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).
Furthermore,
once Complainant asserts a prima facie case against Respondent, the
burden of proof shifts to Respondent to demonstrate that it has rights to or
legitimate interests in
the <century21homesforsale.com> domain
name. By neglecting to respond, Respondent has failed to invoke any circumstances
that could manifest rights to or legitimate
interests in the disputed domain
name. See BIC Deutschland GmbH
& Co. KG v. Tweed, D2000-0418 (WIPO June 20, 2000) (“By not submitting
a response, Respondent has failed to invoke any circumstance which could
demonstrate,
pursuant to ¶ 4(c) of the Policy, any rights or legitimate
interests in the domain name”); see also Geocities v. Geociites.com, D2000-0326 (WIPO June 19, 2000)
(finding that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name
because Respondent
never submitted a response or provided the Panel with
evidence to suggest otherwise).
Respondent is
using the <century21homesforsale.com> domain name to redirect
Internet users to a website that offers the same real estate services as those
provided by Complainant under
its mark. The use of a domain name confusingly
similar to a registered trademark to offer services that compete with the mark
holder’s
business is neither a bona fide offering of goods or services pursuant
to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) nor a legitimate noncommercial or fair
use pursuant to
Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). See Ameritrade Holdings Corp. v. Polanski, FA 102715
(Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 11, 2002) (finding that Respondent’s use of the disputed
domain name to redirect Internet users
to a financial services website, which
competed with Complainant, was not a bona fide offering of goods or services); 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).
Complainant
asserts that Respondent has not now, nor has it ever been, a licensee of
Complainant, nor has Respondent ever had any
affiliation with Complainant.
Moreover, Respondent has produced no evidence and there is nothing in the
record that indicates Respondent
is commonly known by CENTURY 21 HOMES FOR SALE
or <century21homesforsale.com>. Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent
has failed to demonstrate any rights to or legitimate interests in the disputed
domain
name with regard to Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). 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 RMO, Inc. v.
Burbridge, FA 96949 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 16, 2001) (interpreting Policy ¶
4(c)(ii) "to require a showing that one has been commonly known
by the
domain name prior to registration of the domain name to prevail").
The Panel finds
that Complainant has established Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).
Policy ¶ 4(b)
lists four circumstances that, if found by the Panel to be present, shall
evidence bad faith registration and use of
a domain name. However, this list
was not meant to be exclusive. Under certain facts, the Panel is permitted to
consider the totality
of the circumstances when deciding whether a particular
domain name has been registered and used in bad faith in accordance with
the
Policy. See Do The Hustle, LLC v. Tropic Web, D2000-0624 (WIPO Aug. 21,
2000) (“the examples [of bad faith] in Paragraph 4(b) are intended to be
illustrative, rather than exclusive”);
see also Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. v. Risser, FA 93761 (Nat. Arb.
Forum May 18, 2000) (finding that in determining if a domain name has been
registered in bad faith, the Panel
must look at the “totality of
circumstances”).
Complainant has
shown that its mark is well-known both in the U.S. and abroad, especially in
the real estate service industry. The
Panel presumes Respondent had actual or
constructive knowledge of Complainant’s rights in its CENTURY 21 mark because
of Respondent’s
use of the <century21homesforsale.com> domain name
to offer the same services as those provided by Complainant. The registration
and use of a domain name confusingly similar
to a trademark despite actual or
constructive knowledge of the mark holder’s rights in its mark is evidence of
registration and use
in bad faith 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).
Furthermore,
Respondent is using the <century21homesforsale.com> domain name to
divert Internet traffic to a website that offers services that compete with
Complainant for commercial gain. Respondent’s
use demonstrates that it is
attempting to attract Internet users to Respondent’s website at the disputed
domain name for commercial
gain by creating a likelihood of confusion with
Complainant’s mark, which evidences bad faith registration and use under Policy
¶
4(b)(iv). See America Online,
Inc. v. Fu, D2000-1374 (WIPO Dec. 11, 2000) (finding that Respondent
intentionally attempted to attract Internet users to his website for commercial
gain by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s mark and offering
the same chat services via his website as Complainant);
see also Identigene, Inc. v. Genetest Lab.,
D2000-1100 (WIPO Nov. 30, 2000) (finding bad faith where Respondent's use of
the domain name at issue to resolve to a website where
similar services are offered
to Internet users is likely to confuse the user into believing that Complainant
is the source of or
is sponsoring the services offered at the site).
The Panel finds
that Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii) has been established.
Having
established all three elements required under ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes
that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it
is Ordered that the <century21homesforsale.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED
from Respondent to Complainant.
Hon. Ralph Yachnin, Panelist
Justice, Supreme Court (Ret.)
Dated: August 21, 2003
WorldLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/GENDND/2003/809.html