World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. v. Mark Adamczyk / My Domain Holdings
Claim Number: FA1703001720446
Complainant is World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Matthew C. Winterroth of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., Connecticut, USA. Respondent is Mark Adamczyk / My Domain Holdings (“Respondent”), Florida, USA.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com>, registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC.
The undersigned certifies that he or she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his or her 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 Forum electronically on March 7, 2017; the Forum received payment on March 7, 2017.
On March 8, 2017, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. GoDaddy.com, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, LLC registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).
On March 8, 2017, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of March 28, 2017 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com. Also on March 8, 2017, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts.
Having received no response from Respondent, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On April 6, 2017, 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" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. 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
Complainant, World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., is a global leader in the sports entertainment industry. Complainant uses the WRESTLEMANIA mark to promote its goods and services. Complainant has rights in the WRESTLEMANIA mark based upon registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (e.g. Reg. No. 1,432,884, registered Mar. 17, 1987). Respondent’s domain name, <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com>, is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark as it contains the mark in its entirety and adds the descriptive word “orlando” and the date “2017”, as well as the generic top level domain (“gTLD”) “.com.”
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> domain name. Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and has failed to use the disputed domain name for a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Instead, the domain name resolves to Respondent’s own competing page for the purpose of benefiting Respondent.
Respondent should be considered to have registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith. Respondent utilizes the domain name to pass off as Complainant, enjoying the benefit of good will associated with Complainant’s WRESTLEMANIA mark. Respondent’s bad faith is further evidenced through its use of Complainant’s marks and logos to compete with Complainant’s business.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Complainant, World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., is a global leader in the sports entertainment industry. Complainant has rights in the WRESTLEMANIA mark based upon registration with the USPTO (e.g. Reg. No. 1,432,884, registered Mar. 17, 1987). Respondent’s domain name, <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com>, is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark.
Respondent, Mark Adamczyk / My Domain Holdings, created the <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> domain name on November 11, 2016.
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> domain name.
Respondent registered and used the <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> domain name in bad faith. Respondent uses the domain name to pass off as Complainant, enjoying the benefit of good will associated with Complainant’s WRESTLEMANIA mark, using Complainant’s marks and logos to compete with 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."
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.
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(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations and inferences set forth in the Complaint as true unless the evidence is clearly contradictory. See Vertical Solutions Mgmt., Inc. v. webnet-marketing, inc., FA 95095 (Forum July 31, 2000) (holding that the respondent’s failure to respond allows all reasonable inferences of fact in the allegations of the complaint to be deemed true); see also 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.”).
Complainant has rights in the WRESTLEMANIA mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) based upon registration with the USPTO. See BGK Trademark Holdings, LLC & Beyoncé Giselle Knowles-Carter v. Chanphut / Beyonce Shop, FA 1626334 (Forum Aug. 3, 2015) (Complainant’s registration with the USPTO or any other governmental authority proves its rights under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).).
Respondent’s domain name, <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com>, is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark as it contains the mark in its entirety and adds the geographic term “orlando” and descriptive word “2017,” and the gTLD “.com.”
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com>. Respondent has not been commonly known by the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). Complainant has not authorized Respondent to use the WRESTLEMANIA mark. The WHOIS information of record identifies Respondent as “Mark Adamczyk” with “My Domain Holdings.” See State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Dale Anderson, FA 1613011 (Forum May 21, 2015) (concluding that because the WHOIS record lists “Dale Anderson” as the registrant of the disputed domain name, the respondent was not commonly known by the <statefarmforum.com> domain name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii)).
Respondent has failed to use <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. The domain name resolves to a page that offers services in direct competition with Complainant’s business. Respondent offers unauthorized ticket sales to Complainant’s WRESTLEMANIA event. Use of a confusingly similar domain name to divert Internet users to a website which competes with a complainant’s business does not demonstrate rights or legitimate interests under Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) or (iii). See General Motors LLC v. MIKE LEE, FA 1659965 (Forum March 10, 2016) (finding that “use of a domain to sell products and/or services that compete directly with a complainant’s business does not constitute 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).”).
Respondent has demonstrated a pattern of bad faith registration and use through registration of multiple domain names, each utilizing Complainant’s WRESTLEMANIA mark. Complainant has had a disputed domain name registered by Respondent transferred previously. See World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. v. Mark Adamczyk / My Domain Holdings, FA 1701937 (Forum Dec. 8, 2016) (registration of <wrestlemaniaorlando.com> domain name and ensuing transfer). Where a respondent has been previously ordered to transfer disputed domain names to a complainant, a panel may find evidence of a pattern of bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii). See Webster Financial Corporation and Webster Bank, National Association v. Above.com Domain Privacy, FA 1464477 (Forum Nov. 30, 2012) (where the respondent had been a respondent in other UDRP proceedings in which transfer of the disputed domain names was ordered, a pattern of bad faith registration and use of domain names was established under Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii)). Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent registered and used <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> in bad faith registration pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(ii).
Respondent has registered and used <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> in bad faith by offering goods and services that directly compete with Complainant’s business. Use of a confusingly similar website to offer goods and services in direct competition with a complainant’s business can be evidence of bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶¶ 4(b)(iii) & (iv). See Fitness International, LLC v. ALISTAIR SWODECK / VICTOR AND MURRAY, FA 1623644 (Forum July 9, 2015) (“Respondent uses the at-issue domain name to operate a website that purports to offer health club related services such as fitness experts, fitness models, fitness venues, exercise programs, and personal training, all of which are the exact services offered by Complainant. Doing so causes customer confusion, disrupts Complainant’s business, and demonstrates Respondent’s bad faith registration and use of the domain name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii).”); see also ShipCarsNow, Inc. v. Wet Web Design LLC, FA 1601260 (Forum Feb. 26, 2015) (“Respondent’s use of the domain name to sell competing services shows that Respondent is attempting to commercially benefit from a likelihood of confusion. Therefore the Panel finds that a likelihood of confusion exists, that Respondent is attempting to commercially benefit from Complainant’s mark, and that Complainant has rights that predate any rights of the Respondent, all of which constitutes bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv).”). The Panel finds that Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶¶ 4(b)(iii) & (iv).
Respondent passes itself off as Complainant through its use of the disputed domain name and resolving website, and receives the benefit of the valuable goodwill Complainant has within the WRESTLEMANIA mark. Use of a mark to pass off as the registered owner is evidence of bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See Am. Int’l Group, Inc. v. Busby, FA 156251 (Forum May 30, 2003) (finding that the respondent attempts to pass itself off as the complainant online, which is blatant unauthorized use of the complainant’s mark and is evidence that the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name); see also Monsanto Co. v. Decepticons, FA 101536 (Forum Dec. 18, 2001) (finding that the respondent's use of <monsantos.com> to misrepresent itself as the complainant and to provide misleading information to the public supported a finding of bad faith). The Panel finds that Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv).
Complainant alleges Respondent’s registration and use of <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> was opportunistic based upon timing and the famous nature of the WRESTLEMANIA mark. Complainant announced March 8, 2016 that their next WRESTLEMANIA event was to be held in Orlando in 2017. Four days later, Respondent registered the disputed domain name. Where a respondent has registered a domain name within days of a complainant’s announcement of the relevance of the domain, panels have found evidence of opportunistic bad faith. See Amazon Technologies, Inc. v. harshit dhingaun, FA1505001619696 (Forum June 10, 2015) (holding that the respondent had demonstrated opportunistic bad faith according to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii), when it registered the <amazonfashionindia.com> and <amazonindiafashion.com> domain names within days after the announcement of the complainant’s sponsorship of India Fashion Week). Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s WRESTLEMANIA mark through registration and use of the <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> domain name. Respondent’s knowledge of the mark is demonstrated through its addition of “2017” to Complainant’s mark to correspond to Complainant’s 2017 event. Therefore, Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See Google Inc. v. Ahmed Humood, FA 1591796 (Forum January 7, 2015) (“This Panel makes that inference; Respondent has actual knowledge of Complainant’s mark at the time of domain name registration based on the fame of Complainant’s GOOGLE mark and Respondent’s use of one of the disputed domain names to detail Internet domain name registration and maintenance services related to and in competition with Complainant.”).
Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <wrestlemaniaorlando2017.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Charles K. McCotter, Jr. (Ret.), Panelist
Dated: April 20, 2017
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page