URS FINAL DETERMINATION

Virgin Enterprises Limited v. Tom Williamson et al.
Claim Number: FA1608001691851

DOMAIN NAME

<virginaustralia.social>

PARTIES

	Complainant: Virgin Enterprises Limited of London, United Kingdom
	Complainant Representative: Stobbs Julius E Stobbs of Cambridge, United Kingdom

	Respondent: Tom D Williamson of North Sydney, Australia

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS

	Registries: United TLD Holdco Ltd.
	Registrars: GoDaddy.com, 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.
	Natalia Stetsenko, as Examiner

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

	Complainant Submitted: August 31, 2016
	Commencement: September 1, 2016
	Response Date: September 2, 2016
	Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the 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

Findings of Fact: The Complainant has established rights in the VIRGIN and VIRGIN AUSTRALIA trademarks based on registrations pre-dating the registration of the disputed domain name. The ownership and use have been confirmed by respective entries in the Trademark Clearinghouse.

URS Procedure 1.2.6, requires Complainant to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, 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:
  (i) for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use; or
  (ii) that has been validated through court proceedings; or
  (iii) that is specifically protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the URS complaint is filed.

Determined: Finding for Complainant

The disputed domain name incorporates the Complainant’s registered marks VIRGIN and VIRGIN AUSTRALIA in their entirety, simply adding the TLD name “.social”. It is thus found that the disputed domain name is identical with the Complainant’s registered marks. Respondent admitted this in his response.

[URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.

Determined: Finding for Complainant

The Complainant notes that Respondent did not confirm his rights and legal interests in the domain name when given such an opportunity in response to Complainant’s enquiry. Respondent admits that he lacks rights and legitimate interests in the present domain name in his response.

[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
  a. Registrant has registered or acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or
  b. Registrant has registered the domain name in order to prevent the trademark holder or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that Registrant has engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
  c. Registrant registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
  d. 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.

Determined: Finding for Complainant

In view of the reputation associated with the Complainant’s trademarks, it is hard to believe that the domain name in question was chosen and registered for any other purpose than taking unfair advantage over the goodwill and reputation associated with the mark. In his response, the Respondent admits that his acts were in bad faith. Given that the Respondent admits that all Complainant’s allegations are true, one may conclude that this was an expression of an implied consent to transfer. As long as the case records do not contain any evidence that the parties have reached a formal settlement, the Examiner can not apply the provisions of Rule 16(a) and terminate the proceeding in this case. Given the fact that all findings in this case are in favor of the Complainant, pursuant to the provisions of Rule 14 (a) of ICANN URS Rules, the Examiner rules on the suspension of the disputed domain name.

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:

The Complaint was neither abusive nor contained material falsehoods.

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:

virginaustralia.social

Natalia Stetsenko
Examiner
Dated: September 7, 2016

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page