Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Generic Top Level Domain Name (gTLD) Decisions |
Popular, Inc. v. Henry Chan
Claim
Number: FA0402000238739
Complainant is Popular, Inc. (“Complainant”),
represented by Michael W.O. Holihan, 1101 North Lake Destiny Drive, Suite
350, Maitland, FL 32751. Respondent is Henry Chan (“Respondent”), P.O Box
SS-6348/A124, Nassau, Bahamas.
REGISTRAR
AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The
domain name at issue is <bancopopulardepr.com>, registered with Iholdings.com,
Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar.com.
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.) as Panelist.
Complainant
submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum")
electronically on February 24, 2004; the
Forum received a hard copy of the
Complaint on February 24, 2004.
On
March 2, 2004, Iholdings.com, Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar.com confirmed by e-mail
to the Forum that the domain name <bancopopulardepr.com> is
registered with Iholdings.com, Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar.com and that Respondent
is the current registrant of the name. Iholdings.com,
Inc. d/b/a
Dotregistrar.com has verified that Respondent is bound by the Iholdings.com,
Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar.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
March 2, 2004, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative
Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"),
setting a deadline of
March 22, 2004 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@bancopopulardepr.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
March 25, 2004, 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.
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 <bancopopulardepr.com>
domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s BANCO POPULAR and BPPR
marks.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or
legitimate interests in the <bancopopulardepr.com> domain name.
3. Respondent registered and used the <bancopopulardepr.com>
domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in
this proceeding.
Complainant,
Popular, Inc., provides banking and insurance services through its banking
subsidiary, Banco Popular de Puerto Rico.
Complainant is the largest banking
entity in Puerto Rico and it operates over 300 branches in Puerto Rico and over
100 branches throughout
the continental United States.
Complainant
holds trademark registrations with the United States Patent and Trademark
Office for the BANCO POPULAR mark (Reg. No.
1882478, issued March 7, 1995) and
the BPPR mark (Reg. No. 1008477, issued April 8, 1975), which stands for Banco
Popular De Puerto
Rico.
Complainant has
used its BANCO POPULAR and BPPR marks in conjunction with banking services in
Puerto Rico for over 100 years. Complainant
has used its BANCO POPULAR mark in
the United States for almost 10 years.
Complainant’s
primary website is located at the <bancopopular.com> domain name. Through
this website, customers can obtain information
about offers for sale, and about
Complainant’s goods and services.
Respondent
registered the <bancopopulardepr.com> domain name on October 10,
2003. Respondent is using the domain name to redirect Internet users to a
website that offers a search
engine for banking and insurance services.
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.
The Panel finds
that Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) has been satisfied.
Respondent is
using the domain name to benefit from Complainant’s goodwill and to intercept
Internet traffic intended for Complainant.
The use of a domain name confusingly
similar to Complainant’s mark to redirect Internet users interested in
Complainant’s services
to a competing website that offers search and directory
services related to Complainant’s services is not a use in 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
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
Winmark Corp. v. In
The Zone, FA 128652
(Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 6, 2002) (finding that Respondent had no rights or
legitimate interests in a domain name that used
Complainant’s mark to redirect
Internet users to a competitor’s website); see also N. Coast Med., Inc. v.
Allegro Med., FA 95541
(Nat. Arb. Forum Oct. 2, 2000) (finding no rights or legitimate interests in a
domain name that diverted Internet users
to Respondent’s competing website through
the use of Complainant’s mark).
Moreover,
Respondent has offered no proof and no evidence in the record suggest that
Respondent is commonly known by <bancopopulardepr.com>. Thus,
Respondent has not established 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 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).
The Panel finds
that Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii) has been satisfied.
Respondent
registered the domain name for its own commercial gain. Respondent’s domain
name diverts Internet users who intend to search
under Complainant’s marks to a
website sponsored by Respondent through the use of a domain name confusingly
similar to Complainant’s
mark. This practice of diversion for commercial gain
evidences bad faith registration of and use of a domain name pursuant to Policy
¶ 4(b)(iv). See G.D. Searle & Co. v. Celebrex Drugstore, FA 123933
(Nat. Arb. Forum Nov. 21, 2002) (finding that Respondent registered and used
the domain name in bad faith pursuant to
Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv) because Respondent
was using the confusingly similar domain name to attract Internet users to its
commercial website);
see also Drs.
Foster & Smith, Inc. v. Lalli, FA 95284 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 21, 2000)
(finding bad faith where Respondent directed Internet users seeking
Complainant’s site
to its own website for commercial gain); see also Luck's Music Library v.
Stellar Artist Mgmt., FA
95650 (Nat. Arb. Forum Oct. 30, 2000) (finding that Respondent had engaged in
bad faith use and registration by linking the
domain name to a website that
offers services similar to Complainant’s services, intentionally attempting to
attract, for commercial
gain, Internet users to its website by creating a
likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s marks).
Respondent
registered the domain name for the primary purpose of disrupting Complainant’s
business by diverting Internet traffic intended
for Complainant to Respondent’s
website which offers directly competing banking and insurance services.
Registration of a domain
name for the primary purpose of disrupting the
business of a competitor is evidence of bad faith registration and use pursuant
to
Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii). See Surface
Protection Indus., Inc. v. Webposters, D2000-1613 (WIPO Feb. 5, 2001)
(finding that, given the competitive relationship between Complainant and
Respondent, Respondent
likely registered the contested domain name with the
intent to disrupt Complainant's business and create user confusion); see
also S. Exposure
v. S. Exposure, Inc., FA 94864 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 18, 2000) (finding
Respondent acted in bad faith by attracting Internet users to a website that
competes with Complainant’s business); see also Puckett, Individually v. Miller, D2000-0297 (WIPO June 12, 2000)
(finding that Respondent has diverted business from Complainant to a
competitor’s website in violation
of Policy 4(b)(iii)).
The Panel finds
that Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii) has been satisfied.
Having
established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel
concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it
is Ordered that the <bancopopulardepr.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED
from Respondent to Complainant.
The Honorable Charles K. McCotter, Jr.
(Ret.), Panelist
Dated:
March 30, 2004
WorldLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.worldlii.org/int/other/GENDND/2004/247.html