Paris Saint-Germain Football SASP v. Alexandr Serenko et al.
Claim Number: FA1406001563159
Complainant: Paris Saint-Germain Football SASP of PARIS, France.
Complainant Representative: Cabinet Plasseraud of Paris, France.
Respondent: Alexandr Serenko of Gurievsk, Unknown, Russia.
Alexandr Serenko of Gurievsk, International, Russian Federation.
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: CLUB Registry
Registrars: Instra Corporation Pty Ltd.
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.
Piotr Nowaczyk, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: June 5, 2014
Commencement: June 5, 2014
Response Date: June 8, 2014
Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the National Arbitration 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.
Procedural Findings:
No domain names are dismissed from this complaint
No domain names are dismissed from this complaint.
Findings of Fact:
The Complainant, Paris Saint-Germain Football, is a well-known French football club established in 1970. The Complainant participates in football games on French and European level. The Complainant owns several trademark registrations including “PARIS SAINT GERMAIN” - inter alia in French Trademark Register - under following numbers: 3647438, 3679878 3671527 and 4014137.
The Respondent admits that the domain name is the same as the Complainant's trademarks. The Respondent states that the domain name was registered in connection with the small start-up project aiming at creating websites. It also admits to have intention to sell the domain name due to lack of financing for the business. Furthermore, the Respondents asserts that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of the administrative proceeding or with material falsehoods.
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.
Legal Findings and Conclusion:
IDENTICAL OR CONFUSINGLY SIMILAR
The domain name, <parissaint-germain.club> is identical to Complainant's “PARIS SAINT GERMAIN” marks since it includes the exact wording of the registered trademarks. The generic word “club” which serves as a gtld does not distinguish the Domain Name. Furthermore, it rather increases risk of confusion since the Complainant's main activity is maintaining a football club. The Examiner finds that the Complainant met the standard sets out in 1.2.6.1. of the URS Procedure since it proved that it holds a valid national trademark registration (in French Trademark Register - No. 3647438, 3679878, 3671527 and 4014137). Further, the Complainant confirmed that the registered trademarks are in current use by presenting screenshots of it website <psg.fr>.
NO RIGHTS OR LEGITIMATE INTERESTS
The Respondent does not have any rights in the name “PARIS SAINT GERMAIN” nor is the Respondent commonly known by this name. The Complainant has not authorized Respondent’s use of its mark and has no affiliation with the Respondent. Furthermore, as confirmed by the Complainant, the Domain Name resolves to a parking page which clearly does not constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services. Therefore, the Examiner finds that the Respondent has established no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name (1.2.6.2. of the UDR Procedure).
BAD FAITH REGISTRATION AND USE
The Complainant has satisfied URS 1.2.6.3 (d) since the Respondent must have known of the Complainant's trademarks when registering <parissaint-germain.club>. The club is famous not only in France but also in Russia. Screenshots of websites in Russian regarding the club activity, presented by the Complainant, only confirms it. Moreover, the Respondent did not present demonstrable preparations to use the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services. Just the opposite, the Respondent admitted his intention to sell the domain name. In the Examiner’s view the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain Internet users to <parissaint-germain.club> by creating a likelihood of confusion with the “PARIS SAINT GERMAIN” mark.
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 names be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration:
Piotr Nowaczyk, Examiner
Dated: June 09, 2014
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page