NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM
URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION
SOCIETE ANONYME DES EAUX MINERALES D’EVIAN v. Hka Privacy
Claim Number: FA1502001602886
DOMAIN NAME
<evian.buzz>
PARTIES
Complainant: SOCIETE ANONYME DES EAUX MINERALES D’EVIAN of Evian-les-Bains, France | |
Complainant Representative: Dreyfus & associés
Nathalie Dreyfus of Paris, France
|
Respondent: Hka c/o Privacy of San Mateo, CA, United States | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: DOTSTRATEGY CO. | |
Registrars: Dynadot LLC |
EXAMINER
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 Examiner in this proceeding. | |
Henrik af Ursin, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: February 2, 2015 | |
Commencement: February 2, 2015 | |
Default Date: February 18, 2015 | |
Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the National Arbitration Forum has discharged its responsibility under URS Procedure Paragraphs 3 and 4 and Rule 4 of the Rules for the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (the "Rules"). |
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration. |
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Clear and convincing evidence. |
FINDINGS and DISCUSSION
Procedural Findings: | ||
Multiple Complainants: No domain names are dismissed from this complaint. | ||
Multiple Respondents: No domain names are dismissed from this complaint. |
Findings of Fact: [OptionalComment] |
Even though the Respondent has defaulted, URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to make a prima facie case, proven by clear and convincing evidence, for each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be suspended.
[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar
to a word mark: Determined: Finding for Complainant The Complainant is the holder of a number of validly registered EVIAN word marks, which are in current use. The registered domain name <evian.buzz> is identical with the said trademarks. The requirements set forth in URS 1.2.6.1 (i) are satisfied. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. The Respondent does not appear to have any rights in the EVIAN trademark nor is the Respondent commonly known by the trademark EVIAN. The word EVIAN is not generic. Use of the said trademark can be considered as referring to the Complainant. The requirement set forth in URS 1.2.6.2 is satisfied.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant The Respondent has registered a domain name that comprises solely of the EVIAN trademark. The Respondent therefore has created a likelihood of confusion between the Complainant's trademarks and the disputed domain name. The disputed domain name resolves to a page with pay-per-click links. The Respondent is therefore not making any legitimate non-commercial nor fair use of the domain name. The Respondent is not making use of the domain name in connection with any bona fide offering of goods or service, either. By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’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 Registrant’s web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location. Thus, the Examiner concludes that the Complainant has established that the Respondent has registered and used the Disputed Domains in bad faith. The Examiner finds that the Complainant has successfully proved the requirements set forth in URS 1.2.6.3 (d). FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it contained material falsehoods. The Examiner finds as follows:
DETERMINATION
After reviewing the parties’ submissions, the Examiner determines that the Complainant
has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing
evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain name(s) be SUSPENDED for
the duration of the registration:
|
Henrik af Ursin Examiner
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page