Hewlett-Packard Company
COMPLAINANT,

vs.

John Zuccarini
RESPONDENT.

DECISION
Forum File No: FA00040000994454

The above entitled matter came on for administrative hearing on May 30, 2000 before the undersigned  on the Complaint of Hewlett-Packard Company hereafter “Complainant”, against John Zuccarini, hereafter “Respondent”.  Complainant was represented by Molly Buck Richard and Jane A. O’Connell of Strasburger & Price, L.L.P., 600 Congress Avenue, Suite 2600, Austin, TX 78701.  There was no appearance or representation on behalf of the Respondent.  Upon the written submitted record the following  DECISION is made:

PROCEDURAL FINDINGS

Domain Name: hewlitpackard.com

Domain Name Registrar: Core-11

Domain Name Registrant: John Zuccarini

Date of Domain Name Registration: November 14, 1999

Date Complaint Filed: April 13, 2000

Date of Commencement of Administrative Proceeding in Accordance with Rule 2(a) and Rule 4(c ): April 17, 2000

Due Date for Response: May 7, 2000

Respondent did not file a response to the Complaint.                                            .

     After reviewing the Complaint and determining it to be in administrative compliance the National Arbitration Forum (The Forum) forwarded the Complaint to the Respondent in compliance with Rule 2(a) and the administrative proceeding was commenced pursuant to Rule 4(c ).  In compliance with Rule 4(d), The Forum immediately notified , the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and the Respondent that the administrative proceeding had commenced.

     On November 14, 1999, Respondent registered the domain name hewlitpackard.com with Core of Dusseldorf, Germany, an entity that is a registrar of domain names.  On April 19, 2000 Core- verified that the Respondent is the Registrant for the domain name hewlitpackard.com and that further by registering the domain name, Respondent agreed to resolve any dispute regarding its domain name through ICANN’s Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy , and the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1.       The Complainant, Hewlett-Packard Company, has been engaged in the development and manufacture of electronic instruments and equipment since 1938 and was incorporated under the laws of the state of California on August 18, 1947.

2.       The Complainant is the owner of numerous trademarks and service marks which incorporate the name Hewlett-Packard.  These trademarks and service marks were registered and used in commerce prior to Respondent’s registration of the domain name hewlitpackard.com with Core on November 14, 1999.

3.       As a condition of registering the domain name with Core, an accredited registrar of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Respondent, John Zuccarini, subjected himself to the Rules and Uniform Dispute  Resolution Policy of ICANN, which require a mandatory administrative proceeding in a domain name dispute under Paragraph 4 of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy.

4.       The domain name hewlitpackard.com registered by the Respondent with Core on November 14, 1999 is phonetically identical and confusingly similar to the trademarks and service marks which the Complainant has exclusive rights and the Respondent knew or should have known that it would easily be mistaken for Hewlett-Packard Company, the Complainant in this case.

5.       The Respondent has not asserted or demonstrated any right or legitimate interest in the domain name or asserted any claim that it was registered and used in good faith.

6.       The web site established by the Respondent under the domain name confused users by using, without authorization, an authentic web page of the Complainant along with Respondents own web pages offering services provided by the Respondent for his commercial gain.

7.       The Respondent’s registration of the domain name was done in bad faith as demonstrated by the fact that Respondent has engaged in a course of conduct of registering domain names that are misspellings but phonetic equivalent of celebrity names such as ophrawinfrey.com, jenniferlopaz.com, britaneyspears.com and salmahayek.com.  Respondent has also employed the same stratagem in registering a domain name known as entertament.com and had registered the name hewlittpackard.com, the subject of a prior arbitration proceeding, which resulted in the transfer of that domain name to the Complainant herein.

CONCLUSIONS

     The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and has no known conflict of interest to serve as arbitrator  in this proceeding.  Having been duly selected, and being impartial, the undersigned makes the following findings and conclusions:

1.       The domain name hewlitpackard.com is identical or confusingly similar to Hewlett-Packard a mark to which the Complainant has a legal right and the Respondent no legal right or interest.

2.       The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respects to the domain name.

3.       The Respondent by creating a likelihood of confusion for the purpose of attracting users to his internet site for his own commercial gain acted in bad faith in registering and using the domain name hewlitpackard.com

4.       The Respondent’s registration and use of the domain name in bad faith is demonstrated by his course of conduct in registering domain names that are misspellings but phonetic equivalents of well known persons, businesses or places.

DECISION

     Based upon the above findings and conclusions, and pursuant to Rule 4(I), it is decided as follows:

     THE UNDERSIGNED DIRECTS THAT THE DOMAIN NAME hewlitpackard.com

REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT JOHN ZUCCARINI BE TRANSFERRED TO COMPLAINANT HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY.

     Dated: May 30, 2000 by Judge Gilbert T. Cave (ret.), Arbitrator,