Bloomberg Finance L.P. v. Andrew Mackler
Claim Number: FA1702001717604
Complainant is Bloomberg Finance L.P. (“Complainant”), represented by William M. Ried of Bloomberg L.P., New York, USA. Respondent is Andrew Mackler (“Respondent”), Delaware, USA.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <bloombergstreaming.com>, registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC.
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding.
Hon. Karl v. Fink (Ret.) as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on February 16, 2017; the Forum received payment on February 16, 2017.
On February 17, 2017, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <bloombergstreaming.com> domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. GoDaddy.com, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, LLC 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 February 17, 2017, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of March 9, 2017 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@bloombergstreaming.com. Also on February 17, 2017, 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 February 21, 2017.
On February 28, 2017, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Hon. Karl V. Fink 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" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2.
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant uses the BLOOMBERG mark in connection with its operations in the electronic trading industry, financial news, and information businesses. Complainant registered the BLOOMBERG mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (e.g., Reg. No. 2,736,744, registered July 15, 2003), establishing rights in the mark. Respondent’s <bloombergstreaming.com> is confusingly similar to the BLOOMBERG mark because it incorporates the mark in its entirety while merely appending the term “streaming” and the “.com” generic top-level domain (“gTLD”).
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the at-issue domain name. Respondent has not been commonly known by the domain name based on WHOIS information and a lack of any evidence to the contrary. Further, Respondent’s use of the domain is not in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Respondent uses the domain to display links to unrelated third-party advertising sites.
Respondent registered and used <bloombergstreaming.com> in bad faith. Due to the fame and notoriety of Complainant’s mark, Respondent registered the domain name with actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the mark.
B. Respondent
Respondent consents to the transfer of the domain name, stating, “I propose transferring rights to [<bloombergstreaming.com>] to Bloomberg Finance L.p. unconditionally.”
Preliminary Issue: Consent to Transfer
Respondent consents to transfer <bloombergstreaming.com> to Complainant. However, after the initiation of this proceeding, GoDaddy.com, LLC placed a hold on Respondent’s account and therefore Respondent cannot transfer the disputed domain name while this proceeding is still pending. The Panel finds that in a circumstance such as this, where Respondent has not contested the transfer of the disputed domain name but instead agrees to transfer the disputed domain name to Complainant, the Panel will forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order an immediate transfer of the <bloombergstreaming.com domain name. See Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. – Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where the respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Forum Jan. 13, 2004) (“In this case, the parties have both asked for the domain name to be transferred to the Complainant . . . Since the requests of the parties in this case are identical, the Panel has no scope to do anything other than to recognize the common request, and it has no mandate to make findings of fact or of compliance (or not) with the Policy.”); see also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Forum June 24, 2005) (“[U]nder such circumstances, where Respondent has agreed to comply with Complainant’s request, the Panel felt it to be expedient and judicial to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order the transfer of the domain names.”).
The Respondent having consented to the transfer of the <bloombergstreaming.com> domain name, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <bloombergstreaming.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant
__________________________________________________________________
Hon. Karl V. Fink (Ret.) Panelist
Dated: March 2, 2017
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page