The Complainant is Cable News Network LP, LLLP, Atlanta, GA, USA ("Complainant") represented by Christopher B. Roblyer, of Alston & Bird. The Respondent is Stonybrook Investments, LTD, Belize City, INDIA ("Respondent").

The domain name at issue is wwwcnn.com registered with Tucows.

On January 15, 2001, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a One Member panel, the Forum appointed James P. Buchele as Panelist. The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge, has no known conflict in serving as a panelist in this proceeding.

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum") electronically on December 14, 2000; the Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on December 19, 2000.

On December 22, 2000, Tucows confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain name wwwcnn.com is registered with Tucows and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Tucows has verified that Respondent is bound by the Tucows registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").

On December 22, 2000, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of January 11, 2001 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts, and to postmaster@wwwcnn.com by e-mail.

Having received no Response from Respondent, using the same contact details and methods as were used for the Commencement Notification, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

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." 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 the Respondent.

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

Complainant contends the following with respect to the disputed domain name:

B. Respondent

Respondent did not submit a response in this matter.

CNN is one of the largest electronic news and information companies in the world. For more than twenty years, it has used the service mark CNN to identify its news and information services. Complainant owns numerous valid and enforceable trademarks in its CNN mark and family of CNN marks. In fact, Complainant holds twelve registrations on the Principal Register for the CNN mark alone, along with many others that incorporate the CNN mark. In sum, Complainant holds at least 228 registrations worldwide for variations of its CNN marks.

CNN is an international media and entertainment company with its principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia. CNN’s news and information services are available to more than one billion people worldwide through six cable and satellite television networks (CNN, CNN Headline News, CNN International, CNNfn, CNN/Sports Illustrated and CNN en Español), three private, out-of-home networks, two radio networks, eleven web sites and CNN Newsource, an extensive syndicated news service. CNN’s web site "CNN Interactive" – located at www.cnn.com.

Respondent registered the disputed domain name, wwwcnn.com, on December 4, 2000. Respondent is also the current registrant of the domain names: wwwnorthwestairlines.com, wwwnissan.com, wwwaskjeeves.com, wwwofficemax.com, wwwsubaru.com, wwwlexus.com, wwwfiat.com, wwwamericawestairlines.com, wwwnewyorktimes.com, wwwsportsillustrated.com, wwwdeltaair.com, and wwwporshe.com.

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."

In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of the Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules.

Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that the 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 the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;

(2) the 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.

No doubt, Complainant has rights in its CNN mark. Complainant holds at least 228 registrations worldwide for variations of its CNN marks. Likewise, Complainant has correctly pointed out that numerous Panel decisions have determined that domain names, which add "www" to a protectable mark, are confusingly similar. See ABC Distributing, Inc. v. Alex Fedorev, FA 94787 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 12, 2000) (ordering transfer of wwwabcdistributing.com); Bank of America Corp. v. Cybersquare.com, FA 95113 (Nat. Arb. Forum, Aug 14, 2000) (ordering transfer of wwwnationsbank.com); Bank of America Corp. v. InterMos, FA 95092 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug 1, 2000) (ordering transfer of wwwbankofamerica.com); Bank of America Corp. v. Micah Abrams, FA 95479 (Nat. Arb. Forum Oct 11, 2000) (ordering transfer of wwwbofa.com); Geoffrey, Inc. Inc. v. S Rus, D2000-1008 (WIPO) (ordering transfer of wwwtoysrus.com); Marriott Int’l, Inc. v. Momm Amed Ia, FA 95573 (Nat. Arb. Forum Oct 23, 2000) (ordering transfer of wwwmarriott.com); and World Wrestling Fed’n Entertainment, Inc. v. Matthew Bessette, D2000-0256 (WIPO June 7, 2000) (ordering transfer of wwwwwf.com).

Thus, the Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied ICANN Policy 4(a)(i).

The Panel can find no evidence on which to base any right or legitimate interest of Respondent in the domain name wwwcnn.com. Respondent’s only interest in the domain name appears to be in its value as a typographical error of Complainant’s web site, www.cnn.com.

The Panel has searched the record and found no evidence that:

(i) before any notice to you [Respondent] of the dispute, your [Respondent’s] use 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) you [Respondent] (as an individual, business, or other organization) have been commonly known by the domain name, even if you [Respondent] have acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or

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

Respondent’s use of the domain name is designed to intentionally profit from a typographical error. Such use is not "in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services." See Fanuc Ltd v. Machine Control Services, FA 93667 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 13, 2000) (finding that Respondent had no rights or legitimate interest because Respondent does not own the registered mark, has no permission from the Complainant to use the mark, nor is affiliated with the Fanuc business in any way).

Therefore, the panel concluded that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name.

Respondent’s registration and use of wwwcnn.com is clearly in bad faith. Respondent registered and used the domain name with actual knowledge of Complainant’s mark. Further, Respondent’s ‘typosquatting’ is done in violation of the ICANN Policy 4(b)(iv).

Typosquatting involves the registration and use of domain names that are the result of common typographical errors of well-known domain names. See PaineWebber, Inc. v. WWWPAINEWEBBER.COM, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6552 (E.D. Va., April 9, 1999).

In this case, an Internet user who neglects to type a ‘.’ between ‘www’ and ‘cnn’ will arrive at Respondent’s web site, instead of Complainant’s. The intended result is that Internet users will be diverted from Complainant’s web site to Respondent’s. Then, once connected to Respondent’s web site, Respondent attempts to profit commercially through offering gambling services and the placement of advertisements.

The whole reason typosquaters are successful is that they register and use domain names, which they know to be confusingly similar to well known trademarks. But under the ICANN Policy, registration of a domain name which one knows to be identical or confusingly similar to another’s trademark is evidence of bad faith. See Household Int’l, Inc. v. Cyntom Enterprises, FA 95784 (NAF Nov. 7, 2000) ("Just as the employment of a well-known business name for no particularly good reason undermines any claim to legitimate interest, so it may also support an inference of a bad-faith attempt to use the name to harass or exploit its legitimate owner… Respondent, if he ever was serious in the registration of this domain name, must have relied on the good chance he would attract [Complainant’s] customers").

Further, Respondent’s registration and use of wwwcnn.com is evidence of bad faith under ICANN Policy 4(b)(iv). Respondent is attempting to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its web site by creating a likelihood of confusion as to the source, sponsorship or affiliation of Respondent’s site. See Bama Rags, Inc. v. Zuccarini, FA 94381 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 8, 2000) (finding that the Respondent’s registration of names of famous people, with slight typographical errors, was evidence of bad faith).

In this case, Respondent’s commercial gain results from the offering of gambling services. See Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc. v Shedon.com, D2000-0753 (WIPO Sept. 6, 2000) (finding that the Respondent violated Policy ¶ 4.b.(iv) by using the domain name britannnica.com to hyperlink to a gambling site).

Therefore, the Panel concludes that Respondent has registered and used the domain name in bad faith.

Having established all three ICANN Policy elements, the Panel concludes that the requested relief be granted.

Accordingly, it is ordered that the domain name wwwcnn.com be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.