DECISION

 

National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences, Inc. v. Rich Valdes / ContinentalMediaGroup.com

Claim Number: FA1803001779136

PARTIES

Complainant is National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences, Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by Joel R. Feldman of Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Georgia, USA. Respondent is Rich Valdes / ContinentalMediaGroup.com ("Respondent"), New Jersey, USA.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <grammysvip.com>, registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC.

 

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.

 

David E. Sorkin as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on March 27, 2018; the Forum received payment on March 27, 2018.

 

On March 28, 2018, GoDaddy.Com, LLC confirmed by email to the Forum that the <grammysvip.com> domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. 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 April 3, 2018, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of April 23, 2018 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via email to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@grammysvip.com. Also on April 3, 2018, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the email 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 26, 2018, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed David E. Sorkin 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.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

Complainant has issued awards to recognize artistic progress and achievements in the field of music and other recordings since 1959. These awards, called the GRAMMY Awards, are issued at an annual awards ceremony that receives widespread international media attention. Complainant owns numerous U.S. trademark registrations for the GRAMMY mark.

 

Respondent registered the disputed domain name <grammysvip.com> in January 2018, using a privacy registration service in an effort to conceal his identity. Complainant states that it has not given Respondent permission to use its GRAMMY mark, and asserts that Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name. The domain name resolves to a web page promoting a viewing party hosted by Respondent. Respondent charges people a fee to attend this party, at which a copyrighted telecast of Complainant's awards ceremony is to be publicly displayed, presumably without a license. Complainant claims that Respondent's party competes with a charity fundraising event hosted by Complainant.

 

Complainant contends on the above grounds that the disputed domain name <grammysvip.com> is confusingly similar to a mark in which Complainant has rights; that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name; and that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.

 

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a mark in which Complainant has rights; that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.

 

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."

 

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.").

 

Identical and/or Confusingly Similar

The disputed domain name <grammysvip.com> corresponds to Complainant's registered GRAMMY trademark, adding a letter "s" and the generic term "vip", along with the ".com" top-level domain. These additions are insufficient to distinguish the domain names from Complainant's mark. See, e.g., National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences, Inc. v. Web House c/o David Roper, FA 1246447 (Forum May 30, 2009) (finding <grammystickets.com> confusingly similar to GRAMMY); Netflix, Inc. v. Linda Deutch, FA 1740569 (Forum Aug. 12, 2017) (finding <netflixvip.com> confusingly similar to NETFLIX); Broadcom Corp. v. Paul DeLand, FA 447319 (Forum May 17, 2005) (finding <vipbroadcom.com> confusingly similar to BROADCOM). The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a mark in which Complainant has rights.

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests

Under the Policy, Complainant must first make a prima facie case that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, and then the burden shifts to Respondent to come forward with concrete evidence of such rights or legitimate interests. See Hanna-Barbera Prods., Inc. v. Entm't Commentaries, FA 741828 (Forum Aug. 18, 2006).

 

The disputed domain name incorporates Complainant's well-known registered mark GRAMMY without authorization. It is being used to promote an event that competes directly with one hosted by Complainant. Such use does not appear to give rise to rights or legitimate interests.

 

Complainant has made a prima facie case that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the domain name, and Respondent has failed to come forward with any evidence of such rights or interests. Accordingly, the Panel finds that Complainant has sustained its burden of proving that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

Finally, Complainant must show that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. Under paragraph 4(b)(iii) of the Policy, bad faith may be shown by evidence that Respondent registered the disputed domain name "primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor." Under paragraph 4(b)(iv), bad faith may be shown by evidence that "by using the domain name, [Respondent] intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to [Respondent's] web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of [Respondent's] web site or location or of a product or service on [Respondent's] web site or location."

 

As noted above, Respondent registered a domain name incorporating Complainant's well-known mark without authorization, and is using the domain name to promote an event that competes directly with an event hosted by Complainant. In the view of the Panel, Respondent's actions are indicative of bad faith registration and use under paragraphs 4(b)(iii) and 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. The Panel so finds.

 

DECISION

Having considered the three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.

 

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <grammysvip.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

David E. Sorkin, Panelist

Dated: April 27, 2018

 

 

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page