JCDECAUX SA v. Geenee / Luke Peterson et al.
Claim Number: FA1904001837712
Complainant: JCDECAUX SA of PLAISIR, France.
Complainant Representative: Nameshield of Angers, France.
Respondent: Geenee of West Hollywood, United States of America.
Geenee / Luke Peterson of West Hollywood, California, US.
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Binky Moon, LLC
Registrars: Name.com, Inc.
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.
Bart Van Besien, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: April 8, 2019
Commencement: April 8, 2019
Response Date: April 23, 2019
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").
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.
Clear and convincing evidence.
The Complainant has shown that it is the owner of the international word trademark “JCDecaux” with registration number 803987, registered on November 27th, 2001. The Complainant has also shown that it has made effective use of this trademark.
The Complainant asserts that it has a strong reputation and a high-profile presence in advertising and media sectors all around the world, with more than 49,300 screens across 30 countries in Airports, Rail and Metro Stations, Shopping Malls, on Billboards and Street Furniture. The Respondent does not refute this.
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 is 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 the Complainant
The Respondent responded to the Complainant’s allegations with regard to URS 1.2.6.1: “This is correct, we purchased this domain for a demonstration meeting with JCD - we do not need this URL and we are happy to transfer it.”
URS 1.2.6.1 (i) covers the domain name at issue in this case. The disputed domain name <jcdecaux.camera> is identical to the Complainant’s international trademark “JCDecaux” with registration number 803987, with the mere addition of the suffix ‘.camera’.
[URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.
Determined: Finding for the Complainant
The Claimant asserts that the Respondent has no rights or interests in respect of the domain name and is not related to the Complainant’s business. The Complainant asserts that it does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Respondent. The Complainant further asserts – on the basis of the Whois information – that the Respondent is not commonly known as "JCDECAUX".
The Respondent responded to Complainant’s allegations with regard to URS 1.2.6.2: “This is correct, we purchased this domain for a demonstration meeting with JCD - we do not need this URL and we are happy to transfer it.”
The Examiner notes that the Respondent did not refute the Complainant’s claims. The Respondent did not provide evidence of legitimate rights or interests in the disputed domain name. There is no evidence of any rights or legitimate interests of the Respondent in the disputed domain name. There is no evidence of any similar or identical trademarks owned by the Respondent. There is no indication of any authorization to use the Complainant’s trademark. There is no indication that the Respondent is otherwise related to the Complainant’s business. There is no evidence of the Respondent being commonly known as “JCDECAUX” prior to the registration of the disputed domain name.
The Examiner decides that the Respondent has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for the Complainant.
The Complainant asserts that it has a strong reputation and a high-profile presence in advertising and media sectors all around the world. The Complainant further asserts that the Respondent was aware of the Complainant’s trademark “JCDECAUX” at the moment of registration of the disputed domain name, and decided voluntarily to create a likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant and its trademark.
These assertions are not refuted by the Respondent.
The Respondent responded to Complainant’s allegations with regard to URS 1.2.6.3: “This is correct, we purchased this domain for a demonstration meeting with JCD - we do not need this URL and we are happy to transfer it.”
The Examiner notes that the Complainant has submitted evidence that the website available via the domain name is a parking page with commercial links. The examiner finds that the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s trademark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of its website, which is evidence of bad faith use and registration, in accordance with the paragraph 1.2.6.3.d of the URS Procedure.
After reviewing the parties’ submissions, the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain name be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration:
<jcdecaux.camera>
Bart Van Besien, Examiner
Dated: April 26, 2019
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page