URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION
WhatsApp Inc. v. duan wei
Claim Number: FA1510001641142
DOMAIN NAME
<whatsapp.top>
PARTIES
Complainant: WhatsApp Inc. of Mountain View, CA, United States of America | |
Complainant Representative: Hogan Lovells (Paris) LLP
David Taylor of Paris, France
|
Respondent: duan wei duan wei of cheng du shi, sc, II, CN | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Jiangsu Bangning Science & Technology Co.,Ltd. | |
Registrars: Chengdu west dimension digital |
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. | |
Mr. Tomáš Abelovský, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: October 6, 2015 | |
Commencement: October 8, 2015 | |
Default Date: October 23, 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
Findings of Fact: Complainant has provided the following initial explanatory text, in its Complaint: “WhatsApp is a mobile messaging "app" which allows users to exchange messages free of charge. It was launched in 2009 and was acquired by Facebook in 2014. Since its launch, WhatsApp has acquired considerable reputation and goodwill worldwide. It is currently one of the fastest growing and most popular mobile applications, with over 800 million monthly active users worldwide. Its main website is available at www.whatsapp.com”. Complainant has provided following evidences: (1) the print-screens of Proof of the use of its trademark; (2) the Domain Name’s website screenshot; and (3) the Complainants’s trademark record (USPTO). Respondent has not provided its Response to the Complaint. |
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.
[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar
to a word mark: Determined: Finding for Complainant Complainant has proven that he uses registered trademark “WHATSAPP”. The Domain Name reproduces the Complainant's trademark. Also, the new gTLD “.TOP” does not reduce the similarity with the Complainant's trademark. Therefore, the registered Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a word mark for which the Complainant holds a valid national registration and that is in current use. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant Complainant has proven that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name. Furthermore, the Complainant has not authorized the Respondent to make any use of his trademarks.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant Respondent has registered and used the Domain Name in bad faith and Complainant has thus satisfied paragraph 1.2.6.3 of the URS Procedure. Complainant's trademark is well-known and has been extensively used before the Domain Name’s registration in 2014. Furthermore, Respondent must have been aware of this well-known trademark (and its services) at the time of the registration of the Domain Name and must also have known that the registration of the Domain Name was in bad faith. Also, the Respondent registered the Domain Name to prevent the Complainant from using/reflecting its trademark in a corresponding Domain Name, and has engaged in a pattern of such conduct (Complainant has pointed on other disputable registration of famous string in Complainantπ’s portfolio). Also, Examiner agrees with provided cases law (WIPO Case No. D2000-0003 and NAF Claim Number: FA1409001582246). Therefore, the Domain Name itself, which consists of an exact match of the Complainant's trademark, cannot represent a good faith use of the Domain Name under mentioned circumstances in this matter. Contrariwise, it would result in breaching of the Complainant's rights. FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it contained material falsehoods. The Examiner finds as follows:
DETERMINATION
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 name(s) be SUSPENDED for
the duration of the registration:
|
Mr. Tomáš Abelovský Examiner
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page