URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION

 

BOURSORAMA S.A. v. Sebastien Martin

Claim Number: FA1509001635902

 

DOMAIN NAME

<boursorama.xyz>

 

PARTIES

Complainant:  BOURSORAMA S.A. of Boulogne Billancourt, France.

Complainant Representative: Marine Watine

Complainant Authorized Representative: Anne Morin, Nameshield of Angers, France.

 

Respondent:  Sebastien Martin of Noisy le grand, International, FR.

 

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS

Registries:  XYZ.COM LLC

Registrars:  OVH sas

 

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.

 

Omar Haydar, as Examiner.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted: September 1, 2015

Commencement: September 2, 2015   

Default Date: September 19, 2015

 

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

 

The complaint and findings relate to one domain < boursorama.xyz >. There is one Complainant and one (or more) Respondent, and no domain names were dismissed from this complaint.

 

The Respondent has registered the domain name < boursorama.xyz >.

 

Complainant, BOURSORAMA S.A., is the owner of trademark BOURSORAMA, registered in 2000 in France. Further, Complainant registered and has operated the website <boursorama.com> since 2001 as a financial news and services portal, which Examiner has confirmed is currently in use as at the date of this determination.

 

Complainant has claimed that the domain name in question is identical to their protected word or mark.

 

 

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.

 

1.    The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar to a word or mark for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use.

2.    Respondent has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.

3.    The domain name(s) was/were registered and are being used in bad faith.

 

The Examiner finds that Complainant has proven that the domain name is identical through evidence of the trademark registration. The Complainant’s trademark is an established mark, in use for at least fifteen years with use and recognition as a platform and source for financial news and services. The domain name is not alternatively a common term or word that has usage outside the trademarked entity.

 

The Examiner further finds that Complainant has proven that Respondent has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. The Complainant has no business with the Respondent, and has not authorized or licensed Respondent for the use of the protected mark. Additionally, the Respondent has not made any claim to a legitimate right or interest to the name, whether by responding to this Complaint or vis-a-vis the content of their website, which was inaccessible/inoperable at the date of this determination.

 

The Examiner finds that the evidence proves the domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith. The Examiner finds the use of the trademarked term, which is not a common term, in the domain name with no other meaningful use or reference to the trademarked name, as sufficient evidence of bad faith. The domain gives an automatic inference of affiliation to the entity holding the trademark, and would cause confusion amongst internet users into an assumption of an affiliation or relationship. (See Treeforms.com FA0010000095856)

 

DETERMINATION

After reviewing the Complainant’s 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.

[boursorama.xyz]

 

 

Omar Haydar, Examiner

Dated:  September 19, 2015

 

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page