DECISION

 

Chia Network Inc. v. Darrin Demchuk

Claim Number: FA2403002090506

 

PARTIES

Complainant is Chia Network Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by Mark A. Steiner of Duane Morris LLP, California, USA. Respondent is Darrin Demchuk ("Respondent"), California, USA.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <chiaforum.com>, registered with NameCheap, Inc.

 

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.

 

Alan L. Limbury, as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on March 26, 2024. Forum received payment on March 26, 2024.

 

On March 27, 2024, NameCheap, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <chiaforum.com> domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. NameCheap, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the NameCheap, Inc. 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 29, 2024, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of April 18, 2024 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@chiaforum.com. Also on March 29, 2024, 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, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

 

On April 19, 2024, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed as Panelist.

 

Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that 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, 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, Chia Network Inc., provides a variety of technology-related services under the CHIA mark, in which it has rights through numerous registrations, including with the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO"). Complainant has over 103,000 X/Twitter followers, over 46,000 Reddit community members, making it within the top 3% of Reddit communities, and over 7,000 Instagram followers.

 

Respondent's <chiaforum.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's CHIA mark.

 

Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the <chiaforum.com>  domain name.  Respondent has no connection or affiliation with Complainant and has not received any license or consent to use the CHIA mark in a domain name or in any manner. It does not appear that Respondent is commonly known by the domain name, which incorporates Complainant's CHIA mark in its entirety.

 

Respondent does not use the domain name for any bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Respondent's use of the confusingly similar domain name results in the tarnishment of Complainant's trademark as described in paragraph 4(c)(iii) of the Policy. Users of Respondent's forum regularly complain of a lack of moderation resulting in numerous scams directly related to Complainant's CHIA mark and services. Moreover, users of Respondent's forum directly blame Complainant for Respondent's lack of moderation as well as blame Complainant for the influx of scam and spam posts on Respondent's forum.

 

Respondent registered the <chiaforum.com> domain name in bad faith with actual knowledge of Complainant's rights in the CHIA mark and uses it in bad faith in connection with a technical support phishing scam wherein login and account information is sought from Complainant's legitimate consumers on Respondent's website. These phishing attempts

directly target Complainant's clients. Specifically, Respondent's users represent that they are opening a tech support "ticket" to resolve an issue that Complainant's consumer is having and then seek details about the consumer's online digital wallet in order to drain the account. No actual support ticket or assistance is ever provided to the consumer. These fraudulent phishing attempts encourage Complainant's consumers to transfer all cryptocurrency in their accounts, including cryptocurrency other than Complainant's. Once the funds are transferred, the consumer is unable to recover their lost cryptocurrency.

 

Either Respondent is a part of the phishing scams or is complicit in them by allowing users to continue their fraudulent practices without recourse due to Respondent's failure to moderate and control its website.

 

B. Respondent

Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

Complainant has established all the elements entitling it to relief.

 

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 the domain name should be cancelled or transferred:

 

(i)                      the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and

(ii)                      Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and

(iii)                      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 as it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules.  The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations set forth in a complaint. However, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) ('Because Complainant did not produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations [. . .] the Panel finds it appropriate to dismiss the Complaint').

 

Identical and/or Confusingly Similar

Complainant has shown that it has rights in the CHIA mark through numerous registrations, including with the USPTO (e.g., Reg. No. 6,428,600, registered on July 20, 2021 in Class 9 for inter alia "Computer application software for servers, computers and mobile devices, namely, software for secure aggregation, processing, monitoring and analyzing data and for facilitating and managing digital currency and financial transactions"). The application to register the mark was filed on February 19, 2018.

 

The Panel finds Respondent's <chiaforum.com> domain name to be confusingly similar to Complainant's mark, only differing by the addition of the  generic word "forum", which does nothing to distinguish the domain name from the mark, and the inconsequential ".com" generic top-level domain ("gTLD"), which may be ignored. See, for example, Rollerblade, Inc. v. Chris McCrady, WIPO Case No. D2000-0429.

 

Complainant has established this element.

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests

Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy sets out three illustrative circumstances as examples which, if established by Respondent, shall demonstrate rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy, i.e.

 

(i)         before any notice to Respondent of the dispute, the use by Respondent of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or

 

(ii)         Respondent (as an individual, business or other organization) has been commonly known by the domain name, even if Respondent has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or

 

(iii)         Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert customers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.

 

The <chiaforum.com> domain name was registered on March 22, 2021, some three years after Complainant applied to register its CHIA mark. It resolves to a website displaying Complainant's CHIA mark and purporting to be a community discussion platform about Complainant's services. There is no disclaimer of any association with Complainant.

 

These circumstances, together with Complainant's assertions, are sufficient to constitute a prima facie showing of absence of rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name on the part of Respondent. The evidentiary burden therefore shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the <chiaforum.com> domain name. See JUUL Labs, Inc. v. Dryx Emerson / KMF Events LTD, FA1906001849706 (Forum July 17, 2019). Respondent has made no attempt to do so.

 

The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name.

 

Complainant has established this element.

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

The four illustrative circumstances set out in paragraph 4(b) of the Policy as evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii) are not exclusive.

 

The circumstances set out above in relation to the second element satisfy the Panel that Respondent was fully aware of Complainant's application to register its CHIA mark when Respondent registered the <chiaforum.com> domain name and that Respondent registered and is using the domain name in bad faith to conduct or enable phishing for information from Complainant's community members.

 

Complainant has established this element.

 

DECISION

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 <chiaforum.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

 

Alan L. Limbury, Panelist

Dated: April 22, 2024