Thomson Reuters Global Resources v. Cherrydrop.com / S. Johnson / Top Hat Resourcing Ltd
Claim Number: FA1208001460584
Complainant is Thomson Reuters Global Resources (“Complainant”), represented by Alexandre A. Montagu of MontaguLaw, P.C., New York, USA. Respondent is Cherrydrop.com / S. Johnson / Top Hat Resourcing Ltd (“Respondent”), United Kingdom.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The domain names at issue are <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com>, registered with CSL COMPUTER SERVICE LANGENBACH GMBH d/b/a JOKER.COM.
The undersigned certifies that she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding.
Carol Stoner Esq., as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on August 29, 2012; the National Arbitration Forum received payment on August 29, 2012.
On August 31, 2012, CSL COMPUTER SERVICE LANGENBACH GMBH d/b/a JOKER.COM confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> domain names are registered with CSL COMPUTER SERVICE LANGENBACH GMBH d/b/a JOKER.COM and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. CSL COMPUTER SERVICE LANGENBACH GMBH d/b/a JOKER.COM has verified that Respondent is bound by the CSL COMPUTER SERVICE LANGENBACH GMBH d/b/a JOKER.COM registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).
On September 4, 2012, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of September 24, 2012 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@reuters3000xtra.com and postmaster@treikon.com. Also on September 4, 2012, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts.
A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on September 13, 2012.
Additional Submissions were received by both Complainant and Respondent on September 18, 2012 and were timely submitted.
On September 21 2012, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Carol Stoner, Esq., as Panelist.
Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the “Panel”) finds that the National Arbitration 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” through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2.
Complainant requests that the domain names <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
Complainant, Thomson Reuters Global Resources, has provided information on finance, law, tax, accounting, healthcare, science, and media since the nineteenth century and employs 55,000 people worldwide.
Complainant owns the REUTERS 3000 XTRA mark, which is has used since 1999, and owns trademark registrations with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (Reg. No 2,659,974 registered December 10, 2002) and the Office for Harmonization of the Internal Market (“OHIM”) (Reg. No. 1,259,662 registered November 13, 2000). See Complainant’s Exhibit G. The REUTERS 3000 XTRA mark designates services that provide users with information regarding the “global real-time financial arena,” including news, information, and access to the Reuters trading community. See Complainant’s Exhibit H.
Complainant owns trademark registrations for its THOMSON REUTERS EIKON mark with the USPTO (Reg. No. 4,042,428 registered October 18, 2011) and with the OHIM (Reg. No. 8,202,558 registered March 16, 2010). See Complainant’s Exhibit I. Complainant uses the THOMSONS REUTERS EIKON mark since 2010 to provide financial information, news analytics, and trading tools.
Respondent registered the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name on June 6, 2002. Respondent registered the <treikon.com> domain name on September 16, 2010. See Complainant’s Exhibit B.
Respondent offered both disputed domain names for sale on eBay for £400,000 and used Complainant’s REUTERS 300 XTRA mark and THOMSON REUTERS EIKON marks to generate interests from prospective buyers. See Complainant’s Exhibit K. Respondent demanded payment from Complainant in exchange for transfer of the disputed domain names after Respondent received a letter from Complainant informing Respondent that Respondent’s registration and use of the domain names violated Complainant’s right. See Complainant’s Exhibit M.
Respondent previously used the <treikon.com> domain name to operate a website that featured Complainant’s THOMSON REUTERS EIKON mark, as well as Complainant’s color scheme and logo, and redirected website visitors to Complainant’s website in order to cause confusion to consumers. See Complainant’s Exhibit N.
Respondent’s current use of the <treikon.com> domain name is to host a “coming soon” page for “Top Hat Resourcing” and “I.T. Services Limited,” which are described at the website as “specialists in Market Data Inc. Reuters 3000Xtra Suite Resources for deployment and 1/2/3rd line support.” See Complainant’s Exhibit O.
Respondent previously operated a website at the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name that offered sponsored hyperlinks to competing third-party businesses and stated at the website that the domain name was for sale. See Complainant’s Exhibit P.
Respondent currently uses the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name in the same manner as the current use of the <treikon.com> domain name. See Complainant’s Exhibit Q.
The <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name is identical to Complainant’s REUTERS 3000 XTRA mark, and the <treikon.com> domain name is confusingly similar to the THOMSON REUTERS EIKON mark.
Respondent does not possess rights or legitimate interests in either the <reuters3000xtra.com> or the <treikon.com> domain names and is not commonly known by either domain name. Respondent does not have permission from
Complainant to use the REUTERS 3000 XTRA mark or the THOMSON REUTERS EIKON mark in any way, and Respondent does not make a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain names.
Respondent registered the <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> domain names in bad faith, with the intent of confusing consumers and making a profit. Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain names demonstrates opportunistic bad faith. Respondent’s attempt to sell the disputed domain names for a cost in excess of its out-of-pocket costs was in bad faith.
By featuring hyperlinks that compete with Complainant’s business, Respondent demonstrates bad faith registration and use. Respondent’s use of Complainant’s THOMSON REUTERS EIKON trademark, as well as Complainant’s distinctive color scheme and logo at the resolving website, shows that Respondent attempts to pass itself off as Complainant. Respondent’s use of both the <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> domain names disrupts Complainant’s business. Respondent has established a pattern of bad faith registration by using Complainant’s trademarks in two domain names.
B. Respondent makes the following allegations:
Complainant’s trademark for the REUTERS 3000 XTRA mark is not registered for the purpose of offering support services for which Respondent registered the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name. The <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name was not a registered trademark in the category for which Respondent registered the domain name in 2002. Respondent’s website at the time of the Complaint did not promote services that infringed on Complainant’s rights.
The <treikon.com> domain name does not reflect any registered trademark or acronym belonging to Complainant, and the name is a character on the game World of Warcraft.
Respondent does not own the eBay account advertising the disputed domain names for sale.
Respondent did not attempt to cause confusion by redirecting website visitors from the <treikon.com> domain name to Complainant’s official website.
Respondent’s previous use of the <treikon.com> domain name was changed in compliance with Complainant’s request to disable the website at that domain name.
Respondent did not operate the website found at the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name; rather, the domain name was placed at a holding site that posted third-party sponsored links which “average” people ignore and which were not competitive to Complainant’s business.
As with the <treikon.com> domain name, Respondent removed the content at the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name at the request of Complainant, which does not demonstrate an effort to conceal Respondent’s use of the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name.
Respondent denies that the <treikon.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s THOMSON REUTERS mark and that the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s REUTERS 3000 XTRA mark.
Respondent considers its use of the <treikon.com> and <reuters3000xtra.com> domain names legitimate because Respondent worked in the information technology field since 1996, including with Complainant’s company.
Respondent did not register and use the <treikon.com> and <reuters3000xtra.com> domain names in bad faith.
Respondent did not offer the domain names for sale or attempted to pass itself off as Complainant.
Respondent does not intentionally attempt to disrupt Complainant’s business. Complainant’s allegation that Respondent has a pattern of registering domain names that use other entities’ trademarks is incorrect, as Respondent only holds one domain name that incorporates a valid trademark.
Respondent has not attempted to financially gain from either of the disputed domain names.
C. Additional Submissions
Complainant makes the following allegations in its Additional Submission:
Respondent is the party responsible for offering the <treikon.com> and <reuters3000xtra.com> domain names for sale on eBay, and Respondent admitted that
it offered the domain names for sale at its instruction. See Complainant’s Exhibit M. The eBay listing could not have been creating by a party other than Respondent, due to information at the eBay listing site stating, “Reuters have previously tried to acquire the Reuters 300xtra domain name from me, based on copyright ownership but failed. They did not open a discussion to purchase. Documentation of this is available as part of the sale for future protection of ownership.” The posted information would not have been included in the listing if it was created by a third party without specific instruction from Complainant.
Respondent admits that “Reuters3000xtra is meant to mean nothing other than Reuters 3000 Xtra,” which Complainant argues is an admission that the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name is identical to Complainant’s REUTERS 3000 XTRA mark.
Respondent’s claim that the <treikon.com> domain name is the name of a character in the online game World of Warcraft is not supported by evidence and, further, does not affect the domain name’s confusing similarity to Complainant’s THOMSON REUTERS EIKON mark.
Respondent’s argument that Complainant disfavors the shortened name “TR” in place of the THOMSON REUTERS mark is not applicable to the finding of confusing similarity between the mark and the <treikon.com> domain name.
Respondent failed to demonstrate that it had any rights or legitimate interests in the <treikon.com> and <reuters3000xtra.com> domain names.
Respondent admitted its awareness of Complainant’s REUTERS 3000 XTRA product at the time Respondent registered the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name and admits using the domain name to promote its own services. See Complainant’s Exhibit M.
Complainant contends that even if Respondent used the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name for a non-profit purpose, by ceasing to use it in that manner, Respondent no longer has legitimate interests in the domain name. Respondent’s claim that its subsequent use of the disputed domain name to offer “support services” for Complainant’s product is not supported by evidence. Offering “support services” for Complainant’s products does not give Respondent authorization to use Complainant’s mark to register a domain name.
Respondent makes the following allegations in its Additional Submission:
Respondent submits evidence of previous correspondence between it and Complainant that Respondent alleges demonstrates Complainant’s lack of interest in purchasing the domain name. See Respondent’s Exhibit 2-C.
Respondent also submits evidence of the World of Warcraft character upon which Respondent alleges that the <treikon.com> domain name is based. See Respondent’s Exhibit 2-E.
(1) the domain names <treikon.com> and <reuters3000xtra.com> registered by Respondent are 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 names <treikon.com> and <reuters3000xtra.com> ; and
(3) the domain names<treikon.com> and <reuters3000xtra.com> have been registered and are being used in bad faith.
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."
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 or Confusingly Similar: Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).
Complainant owns trademark rights in the REUTERS 3000 XTRA mark through its trademark registrations with the USPTO (Reg. No 2,659,974 registered December 10, 2002) and the OHIM (Reg. No. 1,259,662 registered November 13, 2000). Complainant also owns trademark rights in its THOMSON REUTERS EIKON mark through its trademark registrations with the USPTO (Reg. No. 4,042,428 registered October 18, 2011) and with the OHIM (Reg. No. 8,202,558 registered March 16, 2010). The panel in Honeywell Int’l Inc. v. r9.net, FA 445594 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 23, 2005), found that the complainant’s many trademark registrations throughout the world establish its rights in the mark. The Panel concludes that Complainant’s trademark registrations with the USPTO and the OHIM secure rights in Complainant’s REUTERS 3000 XTRA mark, dating back to November 13, 2000, and its THOMSON REUTERS EIKON mark, dating back to March 16, 2010, under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).
The Panel rules that the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name is identical to its REUTERS 3000 XTRA mark because the domain name fully incorporates Complainant’s mark. Although the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name includes the generic top-level domain (“gTLD”) “.com” and also eliminates the spaces between the words of the mark, these alterations are irrelevant under a Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) analysis. See Croatia Airlines v. Kwen Kijong, AF-0302 (eResolution Sept. 25, 2000) (finding that the domain name <croatiaairlines.com> is identical to the complainant's CROATIA AIRLINES trademark); see also Abt Elecs., Inc. v. Ricks, FA 904239 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 27, 2007) (“The Panel also finds that Respondent’s <abt.com> domain name is identical to Complainant’s ABT mark since addition of a generic top-level domain (“gTLD”) is irrelevant when conducting a Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) analysis.”).
The Panel also rules that the <treikon.com> domain name is confusingly similar to its THOMSON REUTERS EIKON mark because the domain name abbreviates the THOMSON REUTERS portion of the mark to the letters “tr” and prefaces it to the “Eikon” portion of the mark, which Complainant claims has no meaning outside of Complainant’s use of the word in its registered trademark. The disputed domain name does not include the spaces between the words of the mark and does include the gTLD “.com.” However, as above, these alterations are irrelevant under a Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) analysis. See Bond & Co. Jewelers, Inc. v. Tex. Int’l Prop. Assocs., FA 937650 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 30, 2007) (finding that the elimination of spaces between terms and the addition of a gTLD do not establish distinctiveness from the complainant’s mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i)); see also Reese v. Morgan, FA 917029 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 5, 2007) (finding that the mere addition of the generic top-level domain “.com” is insufficient to differentiate a disputed domain name from a mark).
Complainant must first make a prima facie case that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), and then the burden shifts to Respondent to show it does have rights or legitimate interests. See
Hanna-Barbera Prods., Inc. v. Entm’t Commentaries, FA 741828 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 18, 2006) (holding that the complainant must first make a prima facie case that the respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name under UDRP ¶ 4(a)(ii) before the burden shifts to the respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in a domain name); see also AOL LLC v. Gerberg, FA 780200 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 25, 2006) (“Complainant must first make a prima facie
showing that Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interest in the subject domain names, which burden is light. If Complainant satisfies its burden, then the burden shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the subject domain names.”).
Complainant offers evidence that the WHOIS information for the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name identifies “Cherrydrop.com” as the registrant and the WHOIS information for the <treikon.com> domain name identifies “S. Johnson / Top Hat Resourcing Ltd” as the registrant. Therefore, Respondent is not commonly known by either the <reuters3000xtra.com> or the <treikon.com> domain names. In Educ. Broad. Corp. v. DomainWorks Inc., FA 882172 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 18, 2007), the panel determined that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain name based on the evidence submitted, and the respondent did not deny the allegation. The Panel may conclude that the WHOIS information for both of the disputed domain names supports a finding that Respondent is not commonly known by the <reuters3000xtra.com> or <treikon.com> domain names pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii).
Respondent’s exploitation of Complainant’s marks to attempt to profit from the <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> domain names demonstrates that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain names.
The Panel was persuaded by Respondent’s Additional Submission, Exhibit 2-B, that
Respondent had no inherent right to the disputed domains, but was using same without consent, to further his economic concerns. He states to Reuters counsel, on September 1, 2001, in response to their cease and desist letter that “I acquired this domain to promote my support services, a website is almost finished and about to be published.” Though he continues that he did not try to pass himself off, nor to offer competitive services, neither did he acquire license or consent for use of the Reuters trademarks.
In fact, Respondent in his Response admits that “Respondent has worked with Reuters software since 2000, working for Reuters PLC themselves and also for Thomson Financial Services before the companies joined to form Thomson Reuters.” He continues that he went freelance within IT support in 2005. So he is a former employee,
who continues to clothe and present himself in the garb of Reuters trademarks, even to the use of the coloration and style of the logos, for his personal economic benefit. Complainant has offered uncontroverted statements that Respondent is not licensed to use their marks.
Respondent’s attempt to sell the domain name on EBay for more than the out-of-pocket costs associated with registration, also evidences a lack of a legitimate interest in the domain name. The panel in George Weston Bakeries Inc. v. McBroom, FA 933276 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 25, 2007) held that the respondent’s “disproportionate” offer to sell the disputed domain names to the complainant was evidence of the respondent’s lack of rights and legitimate interests in the domain name.
Respondent used the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name to maintain a website that offered sponsored hyperlinks to other websites, some of which were entities competing with Complainant’s business. This competing website is not a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). The panel in United Servs. Auto. Ass’n v. Savchenko, FA 1105728 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 12, 2007), held that offering links to a complainant’s competitors at the website resolving from the disputed domain name is neither a bona fide offering of goods or services nor a legitimate noncommercial or fair use.
Respondent used the <treikon.com> domain name to host a website that imitated the color scheme, logo, and trademark used by Complainant, and redirected Internet users
to Complainant’s own website. The Panel finds that Respondent’s attempt to pass itself off as Complainant by mimicking Complainant’s website is not a bona fide offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). See Am. Int’l Group, Inc. v. Busby, FA 156251 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 30, 2003) (finding that the respondent attempts to pass itself off as the complainant online, which is blatant unauthorized use of the complainant’s mark and is evidence that the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name).
Respondent currently uses both the <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> domain names to link to websites that are inactive and display the message, “New Web page, Coming Soon…” The panel in Thermo Electron Corp. v. Xu, FA 713851 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 12, 2006), held that the respondent’s non-use of the disputed domain names was evidence that the respondent failed to make a bona fide offering of goods or
services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain names. The Panel thus concludes that Respondent’s failure to make an active use of the <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> domain names demonstrates that Respondent was not making a bona fide offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain names under Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii).
Registration and Use in Bad Faith: Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
Respondent says in his Response that he worked at Reuters since 2000 and went freelance in 2005. Respondent audaciously states that he considers his registrations to be legitimate, although by his own admission he was a Reuters employee at this time! Thus, the Panel has no qualms in stating that Respondent had full knowledge of the ownership and fame of the marks at the time of registration.
Respondent’s use of the <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name constituted disruption of
Complainant’s business due to the competing hyperlinks posted at the resolving website. The Panel finds that posting hyperlinks to competing entities’ websites is evidence of Complainant’s bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii).
See H-D Michigan Inc. v. Buell, FA 1106640 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 2, 2008) (“The disputed domain names resolve to websites that list links to competitors of Complainant, evidence that Respondent intends to disrupt Complainant’s business, a further indication of bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii).”).
Complainant offers compelling evidence that the <treikon.com> domain name uses its color scheme, logo, and THOMSON REUTERS EIKON trademark at the resolving website and automatically redirects website visitors to Complainant’s website a few seconds after entering the website. The Panel determines that Respondent’s blatant and trespassing use of another’s intellectual property disrupts Complainant’s business and is evidence of bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). In Target Brands, Inc. v. JK Internet Servs., FA 349108 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 14, 2004), the panel found that the respondent’s registration of the famous TARGET mark, and the use of the complainant’s distinctive logo at the domain name rendered the resolving website indistinguishable from the original, and therefore found that the respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith.
Complainant’s Exhibits O and Q show Respondent’s current use of both the <reuters3000xtra.com> and the <treikon.com> domain names to host a page that displays the message “New Web page, Coming Soon…” As the webpages are nearly
identical, and offer no interactive features for website visitors, the Panel determines that Respondent failed to make an active use of the <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> domain names. This lack of use is further evidence of Respondent’s bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See DCI S.A. v. Link Commercial Corp., D2000-1232 (WIPO Dec. 7, 2000) (concluding that the respondent’s [failure to make an active use] of the domain name satisfies the requirement of ¶ 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).
Respondent listed the <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> domain names for sale at eBay for a price of £400,000, which is evidence of Respondent’s bad faith registration and use. The <reuters3000xtra.com> domain name includes a message at the resolving website indicating that the domain name was for sale. Although Respondent states that this message was not of his doing, Panel is persuaded by Complainant’s Additional Submission , Exhibit B, consisting of a Screenshot of Respondent’s Valuation Request, that Respondent intended to sell the disputed names. Thus, the Panel rules that Respondent’s attempt to sell the <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> domain names for a price in excess of registration costs is evidence of Respondent’s bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(i). In George Weston Bakeries Inc. v. McBroom, FA 933276 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 25, 2007), the panel stated that the respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith because it offered the domain name for sale for more than its out-of-pocket costs associated with registration.
In rendering this decision, the Panel has considered Respondent’s arguments that because Complainant did not pursue further action following its 2002 cease and desist letter, that the Respondent was free to continue to renew the name in the belief that Complainant had no further interest in same. This argument can be framed in terms of the doctrines of laches and detrimental reliance.
The Panel believes that it is appropriate to address these arguments rather than to peremptorily dismiss same, as residing outside the scope of the Policy. The Panel is empowered to consider “principles of law that it deems applicable.” And certainly since at least 1937, when law and equity became amalgamated in the United States, equitable arguments are not here estopped.
Here, laches is not a defense to Complainant’s Complaint, but a factor to be considered in the totality of the circumstances, in appropriate cases.
Respondent registered the domain name while he was still a Reuters employee! Subsequently, Respondent was on notice of the objection because of the cease and desist letter which he received several months after the registrations. He could not cloak himself in the theory of detrimental reliance, as his build-up of his business was always illegitimate, and thus cannot be deemed to be detrimental to an honest interest. He was a mere former employee who did not turn in his “uniform and keys” and who had no license or authority to utilize, for his own purposes, economic benefits which were not his.
Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <reuters3000xtra.com> and <treikon.com> domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Carol Stoner, Esq., Panelist
Dated: October 4, 2012
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page