The Board of Regents, The
Claim Number: FA0804001176863
Complainant is The Board of Regents, The Univeristy of
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <universityoftexas.com>, registered with Fabulous.com Pty Ltd.
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.
Terry F. Peppard as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on April 8, 2008; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on April 9, 2008.
On April 9, 2008, Fabulous.com Pty Ltd. confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <universityoftexas.com> domain name is registered with Fabulous.com Pty Ltd. and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Fabulous.com Pty Ltd. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Fabulous.com Pty Ltd. 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 April 11, 2008, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the “Commencement Notification”), setting a deadline of May 1, 2008 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 firstname.lastname@example.org by e-mail.
A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on April 30, 2008.
A timely Additional Submission was received from Complainant on May 2, 2008, and determined to be complete pursuant to Supplemental Rule 7.
A timely Additional Submission was received from Respondent on May 7, 2008, and determined to be complete pursuant to Supplemental Rule 7.
On May 8, 2008, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Terry F. Peppard as sole Panelist in this proceeding.
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
Complainant contends, among other things, that:
Complainant is a
The flagship institution within The University of Texas System is The University of Texas at Austin (“UT”), founded in 1883.
In addition to providing high-quality educational services, UT actively participates in many collegiate sports, including football, baseball, basketball, cross-country, golf, rowing, soccer, softball, swimming and diving, tennis, track and field, and volleyball.
with its promotion of these activities, Complainant owns a number of trademark
registrations for the
The domain name at
issue in this proceeding is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s
Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests in the subject domain name.
Respondent has not used, nor made any 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.
Respondent uses the domain name in
connection with a search directory page displaying links with titles likely to
be associated with Complainant or its products and services, such as “
Respondent has ignored Complainant’s demands that it cease using the subject domain name, and has continued its infringing activity despite being given notice of Complainant’s trademark rights.
Respondent is not commonly known by the domain name at issue.
The domain name itself is highly likely to cause confusion among Internet users, and the website to which the subject domain name resolves displays links containing clear references to Complainant and its goods and services.
Respondent registered and uses the subject domain name in bad faith.
Respondent contends, among other things, that:
Respondent acquired the subject domain name as part of a portfolio of domains pursuant to a written agreement by which the seller represented and warranted that the domains were not in violation of the intellectual property rights of any third party.
The subject domain name was registered to be used in Respondent’s Direct Navigation business model.
Respondent both registered and uses the domain name in good faith.
Respondent has no desire to retain the domain name or to interfere with Complainant’s asserted mark.
Respondent therefore desires to transfer the domain name to Complainant, and requests that this be done without further proceedings.
C. Additional Submissions
Complainant’s Additional Submission alleges, inter alia, that:
Respondent has engaged in a pattern of bad-faith registration and use of domain names employing the trademarks of others.
Respondent’s attempt to justify its “cyber-squatting” as a “Direct Navigation business model” is not legitimate.
Respondent does not contest that the subject domain name is identical
to Complainant’s registered
Respondent’s Additional Submission alleges, inter alia, that:
Complainant’s Additional Submission was improperly filed.
Respondent acquires domain names because of their generic or descriptive qualities, and, thus, their usefulness in a Direct Navigation business model.
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that, in the ordinary course, Complainant must prove each of the following to obtain from a Panel an order that a domain name be transferred:
i. the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights;
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.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (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.”
Further, Policy ¶ 3(a) provides for the transfer of a domain name registration upon the written instructions of the parties to a UDRP proceeding without the need for otherwise required findings and conclusions (see Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Nat. Ar. Forum Jan. 13, 2004; see also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jun. 24, 2005)).
Respondent does not contest Complainant’s request that the disputed domain name be transferred to Complainant. Indeed, Respondent asserts its desire that the domain name be transferred to Complainant without further proceedings. Thus the parties have effectively agreed in writing to a transfer of the subject domain name from Respondent to Complainant without the need for further proceedings.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <universityoftexas.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED forthwith from Respondent to Complainant.
Terry F. Peppard, Panelist
Dated: May 12, 2008
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page
National Arbitration Forum