DECISION

 

Mercedes Homes, Inc. v. Troy Davy Trust

Claim Number:  FA0301000142324

 

PARTIES

Complainant is Mercedes Homes, Inc., Melbourne, FL (“Complainant”) represented by Patrick F. Roche, of Frese, Nash & Hansen, P.A.. Respondent is Troy Davy Trust, Perth, Western Australia,  (“Respondent”).

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME

The domain name at issue is <mercedeshomesflorida.com>, registered with Tucows, Inc.

 

PANEL

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 Panelist in this proceeding.

 

Honorable Paul A. Dorf (Ret.) as Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum") electronically on January 20, 2003; the Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on January 21, 2003.

 

On January 20, 2003, Tucows, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain name <mercedeshomesflorida.com> is registered with Tucows, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Tucows, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Tucows, Inc. 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 January 21, 2003, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of February 10, 2003 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@mercedeshomesflorida.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.

 

On February 17, 2002, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Honorable Paul A. Dorf (Ret.) as Panelist.

 

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 Respondent.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

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

 

PARTIES' CONTENTIONS

A.  Complainant makes the following assertions:

 

1.   Respondent’s <mercedeshomesflorida.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s MERCEDES HOMES mark.

 

2.   Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the <mercedeshomesflorida.com> domain name.

 

3.   Respondent registered and used the <mercedeshomesflorida.com> domain name in bad faith.

 

B.  Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.

 

FINDINGS

Complainant holds a trademark registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) for MERCEDES HOMES (Reg. No. 2,495,868, issued October 9, 2001) in relation to Complainant’s building construction services. Complainant has used the mark in commerce since 1985. Complainant operates a website at <mercedeshomes.com>, offering information regarding its building services.

 

Complainant has locations throughout four states, including Florida. Complainant maintains its headquarters in Melbourne, Florida and was ranked the seventh largest Florida construction firm in the year 2001 by a Florida publication.

 

Respondent registered the <mercedeshomesflorida.com> domain name December 13, 2002. Respondent is using the disputed domain name to divert Internet traffic to pornographic websites, including <xxxmovieplace.com>, <deeperthroats.com> and <boobvision.com>.

 

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."

 

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(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules.

 

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

(2)  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.

 

Identical and/or Confusingly Similar

Complainant has established it has rights in the MERCEDES HOMES mark through registration with the USPTO and continuous use since 1985.

 

Respondent’s <mercedeshomesflorida.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark because the disputed domain name simply removes the space between the words and adds the word “florida” at the end of the mark. Neither the deletion of spaces nor the addition of the word “florida” significantly distinguishes the<mercedeshomesflorida.com> domain name from Complainant’s MERCEDES HOMES mark. See CMGI, Inc. v. Reyes, D2000-0572 (WIPO Aug. 8, 2000) (finding that the domain name <cmgiasia.com> is confusingly similar to Complainant’s CMGI mark); see also Wembley Nat’l Stadium Ltd. v. Thomson, D2000-1233 (WIPO Nov. 16, 2000) (finding that the domain name <wembleystadium.net> is identical to the WEMBLEY STADIUM mark).

 

The Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) has been satisfied.

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests

Respondent has failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. Thus, the Panel is permitted to accept all reasonable allegations and inferences in the Complaint as true. See Talk City, Inc. v. Robertson, D2000-0009 (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000) (“In the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all allegations of the Complaint”); see also Desotec N.V. v. Jacobi Carbons AB, D2000-1398 (WIPO Dec. 21, 2000) (finding that failing to respond allows a presumption that Complainant’s allegations are true unless clearly contradicted by the evidence).

 

Moreover, Respondent has failed to invoke any circumstances that could demonstrate rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. When Complainant asserts a prima facie case against Respondent, the burden of proof shifts to Respondent to show that it has rights or legitimate interests pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). See Parfums Christian Dior v. QTR Corp., D2000-0023 (WIPO Mar. 9, 2000) (finding that by not submitting a Response, Respondent has failed to invoke any circumstance which could demonstrate any rights or legitimate interests in the domain name); see also Geocities v. Geociites.com, D2000-0326 (WIPO June 19, 2000) (finding that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name because the Respondent never submitted a response nor provided the Panel with evidence to suggest otherwise).

 

Respondent is using the <mercedeshomesflorida.com> domain name to divert Internet traffic to pornographic websites. Our cases have consistently held that diverting Internet users to pornographic websites is neither a bona fide offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4 (c)(i), nor a legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). See Nat’l Football League Prop., Inc. v. One Sex Entm’t Co., D2000-0118 (WIPO Apr. 17, 2000) (finding that the Respondent had no rights or legitimate interests in the domain names <chargergirls.com> and <chargergirls.net> where the Respondent linked these domain names to its pornographic website); see also Brown & Bigelow, Inc. v. Rodela, FA 96466 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 5, 2001) (finding that infringing on another's well-known mark to provide a link to a pornographic site is not a legitimate or fair use).

 

Respondent has not come forward with any evidence to establish that it is commonly known as MERCEDES HOMES FLORIDA or <mercedeshomesflorida.com>. Thus, Respondent has failed to establish that it has rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). See Gallup Inc. v. Amish Country Store, FA 96209 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 23, 2001) (finding that Respondent does not have rights in a domain name when Respondent is not known by the mark); see also Great S. Wood Pres., Inc. v. TFA Assocs., FA 95169 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 5, 2000) (finding that Respondent was not commonly known by the domain name <greatsouthernwood.com> where Respondent linked the domain name to <bestoftheweb.com>).

 

The Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii) has been satisfied.

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

Respondent is using the disputed domain name to divert Internet traffic to various pornographic websites. By linking a confusingly similar domain name to a pornographic website, Respondent has demonstrated bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See Brown & Bigelow, Inc. v. Rodela, FA 96466 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 5, 2001) (use of another's well-known mark to provide a link to a pornographic site is evidence of bad faith registration and use); see also Youtv, Inc. v. Alemdar, FA 94243 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 25, 2000) (finding bad faith where Respondent attracted users to his website for commercial gain and linked his website to pornographic websites).

 

Complainant alleges, and there is no evidence to the contrary, that Respondent is also the registrant of the commercial pornographic websites linked to the <mercedeshomesflorida.com> domain name. Respondent is therefore using a confusingly similar domain name to create Internet-user confusion for its own commercial benefit, which is evidence of bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). See G.D. Searle & Co. v. Celebrex Drugstore, FA 123933 (Nat. Arb. Forum Nov. 21, 2002) (finding that Respondent registered and used the domain name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv) because Respondent was using the confusingly similar domain name to attract Internet users to its commercial website); see also State Fair of Texas v. Granbury.com, FA 95288 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 12, 2000) (finding bad faith where Respondent registered the domain name <bigtex.net> to infringe on Complainant’s goodwill and attract Internet users to Respondent’s website).

 

The Panel finds that Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii) has been satisfied.

 

DECISION

Having established all three elements required under ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.

 

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <mercedeshomesflorida.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

Honorable Paul A. Dorf (Ret.) , Panelist

Dated:   March 4, 2003

 

 

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

 

Click Here to return to our Home Page