URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION


TREND FIN B.V v. REDACTED FOR PRIVACY
Claim Number: FA2208002010373


DOMAIN NAME

<we-fashion.xyz>


PARTIES


   Complainant: TREND FIN B.V of Utrecht, Netherlands
  
Complainant Representative: WAALWEAR BRANDS S.à r.l BENOÎT . NASR of Luxembourg, Luxembourg

   Respondent: Tao Yu of Zhejiang Province, II, CN
  

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS


   Registries: XYZ.COM LLC
   Registrars: 1API GmbH

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.
   Ahmet Akguloglu, as Examiner

PROCEDURAL HISTORY


   Complainant Submitted: August 31, 2022
   Commencement: September 1, 2022
   Default Date: September 16, 2022
   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


   Procedural Findings:  
      Multiple Complainants: The Complainant does not allege multiple Complainants.
      Multiple Respondents: The Complainant does not allege multiple Respondents.

   Findings of Fact: The Complainant is the exclusive owner of the WE trademarks registered and used throughout the world since 1962, notably for clothing and fashion accessories. The Complainant has 148 physical WE stores and runs the international website www.wefashion.com. The trademark registrations of the Complainant include registrations solely consisting of the design “WE” as well as combined registrations such as “WE FASHION”. The Complainant claimed that the domain name used by the Respondent is confusingly similar to their WE trademarks. The Complainant also asserted that the disputed domain name leads to a clone of the Complainant website where the Complainant’s trademark and logo are reproduced and supposedly counterfeit products bearing the Complainant’s trademark are offered for sale.

  

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:
  (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 


It is clear that the Complainant has met its burden by clear and convincing evidence that the domain name is identical to the word mark “WE” and “WE FASHION” for which the Complainant holds valid registrations in various jurisdictions including Benelux as well as United Kingdom and European Union countries,


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

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


The Complainant has clearly stated that the contested domain name “we-fashion.xyz” was registered without permission and that they did not authorize the Respondent for use of the “WE” and “WE FASHION” trademarks. The Respondent did not submit any evidence to the contrary that it has legitimate interest for usage of the the “WE” and “WE FASHION” trademarks. Furthermore, the Respondent has not responded to the Complaint. Therefore, it is understood that the Respondent does not have any right or legitimate interest over the disputed domain name.


[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 


It is obvious that by using the domain name Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to their web site and attempted to create a likelihood of confusion of the Complainant’s trademark. The web site of the Respondent offers counterfeit products of the Complainant bearing that the Complainant’s trademark is offered for sale. It is possible to say that the Respondent harms the commercial reputation of the Complainant and tries to take advantage of it unfairly. Furthermore, it seems that the Respondent reproduces the Complainant’s “WE” (device) logo which is registered in Benelux. In addition, it is not possible to think that the Respondent does not know the Complainant’s trademark "WE FASHION", which is well-known all over the world. Lastly, considering the level of recognition reached by the trademark as a result of its long-term use, it is clear that the Respondent aims to take unfair advantage of the reputation of the Complainant’s trademark.


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:


  1. 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:

  1. we-fashion.xyz

 

Ahmet Akguloglu
Examiner
Dated: September 21, 2022

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page