Yahoo! Inc. v. WWW Enterprise, Inc. a/k/a
WorldWideWeb Enterprise, Inc. a/k/a WorldWideWeb2 Enterprise, Inc. a/k/a
WorldWideWeb3 Enterprise, Inc. a/k/a WorldWideWeb4 Enterprise, Inc. a/k/a
WorldWideWeb14 Enterprise, Inc.
Claim
Number: FA0508000535381
Complainant is Yahoo! Inc. (“Complainant”), represented
by David M. Kelly of Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, L.L.P., 901 New York Avenue, NW, Washington,
DC, 20001-4413. Respondent is WWW Enterprise, Inc. a/k/a WorldWideWeb Enterprise, Inc. a/k/a WorldWideWeb2
Enterprise, Inc. a/k/a WorldWideWeb3 Enterprise, Inc. a/k/a WorldWideWeb4 Enterprise, Inc. a/k/a WorldWideWeb14
Enterprise, Inc. (“Respondent”), P.O Box 118, 5850 W. 3rd Street, Los
Angeles, CA, US, 90036.
REGISTRAR
AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The
domain names at issue are <yyahoo.org>, <kryahoo.org>,
<yahio.org>, <yahoi.org>, <yahookr.org>,
<yahpo.org>, <yahpp.org>, <yajoo.org>, <yaahoo.org>,
<yaoo.org>, <yahoosex.org> and <wwwyahoo.org>,
registered with Iholdings.com, Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar and <yakoo.org>,
<aryahoo.net>, <auctionsyahoo.net>, <auctions-yahoo.net>,
<auctionyahoo.net>, <auction-yahoo.net>, <auyahoo.net>,
<ayhoo.org>, <blogyahoo.com>, <bryahoo.net>,
<cayahoo.net>, <chinayahoo.net>, <chineseyahoo.net>,
<ctyahoo.net>, <deyahoo.net>, <dkyahoo.net>,
<espanolyahoo.net>, <esyahoo.net>, <fryahoo.net>,
<gugiyahoo.com>, <hkyahoo.net>, <inyahoo.net>,
<ityahoo.net>, <jpyahoo.com>, <localyahoo.net>,
<mxyahoo.net>, <myahoo.net>, <noyahoo.net>,
<seyahoo.net>, <sgyahoo.net>, <twyahoo.net>,
<weatheryahoo.net>, <wwwahoo.net>, <wwwayhoo.net>,
<wwwtahoo.net>, <wwwuahoo.net>, <wwwwyahoo.net>,
<wwwyagoo.com>, <wwwyagoo.net>, <wwwyah00.net>,
<wwwyahio.com>, <wwwyaho.net>, <wwwyahoi.com>,
<wwwyahoo.net>, <wwwyahoocom.net>, <wwwyahooo.net>,
<wwwyahoosearch.net>, <wwwyahop.com>, <wwwyahpo.com>,
<wwwyajoo.net>, <wwwyhoo.net>, <wwyahoo.net>,
<wyahoo.net>, <yahio.net>, <yahko.net>, <yahlo.net>,
<ya-hoo.net>, <yahoocojp.com>, <yahoocokr.com>,
<yahoocom.net>, <yahoocpm.com>, <yahooe.net>,
<yahooi.org>, <yahookr.com>, <yahoo-kr.com>,
<yahookr.net>, <yahoovacationsstore.com>, <yahop.net>,
<yahpo.net>, <yahpp.net>, <yahyoo.net>, <yaioo.net>,
<yauoo.net>, <yqhoo.net> and <jpyahoo.net> with
Onlinenic, Inc.
The
undersigned certifies that she acted independently and impartially and that to
the best of his or her knowledge she has no known conflict in serving as
Panelist in this proceeding. Hon.
Carolyn Marks Johnson sits as Panelist.
Complainant
submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically August
5, 2005; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint August
8, 2005.
On
August 8, 2005, Onlinenic, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration
Forum that the <yakoo.org>, <aryahoo.net>, <auctionsyahoo.net>,
<auctions-yahoo.net>, <auctionyahoo.net>, <auction-yahoo.net>,
<auyahoo.net>, <ayhoo.org>, <blogyahoo.com>,
<bryahoo.net>, <cayahoo.net>, <chinayahoo.net>,
<chineseyahoo.net>, <ctyahoo.net>, <deyahoo.net>,
<dkyahoo.net>, <espanolyahoo.net>, <esyahoo.net>,
<fryahoo.net>, <gugiyahoo.com>, <hkyahoo.net>,
<inyahoo.net>, <ityahoo.net>, <jpyahoo.com>,
<localyahoo.net>, <mxyahoo.net>, <myahoo.net>,
<noyahoo.net>, <seyahoo.net>, <sgyahoo.net>,
<twyahoo.net>, <weatheryahoo.net>, <wwwahoo.net>,
<wwwayhoo.net>, <wwwtahoo.net>, <wwwuahoo.net>,
<wwwwyahoo.net>, <wwwyagoo.com>, <wwwyagoo.net>,
<wwwyah00.net>, <wwwyahio.com>, <wwwyaho.net>,
<wwwyahoi.com>, <wwwyahoo.net>, <wwwyahoocom.net>,
<wwwyahooo.net>, <wwwyahoosearch.net>, <wwwyahop.com>,
<wwwyahpo.com>, <wwwyajoo.net>, <wwwyhoo.net>,
<wwyahoo.net>, <wyahoo.net>, <yahio.net>,
<yahko.net>, <yahlo.net>, <ya-hoo.net>, <yahoocojp.com>,
<yahoocokr.com>, <yahoocom.net>, <yahoocpm.com>,
<yahooe.net>, <yahooi.org>, <yahookr.com>,
<yahoo-kr.com>, <yahookr.net>, <yahoovacationsstore.com>,
<yahop.net>, <yahpo.net>, <yahpp.net>, <yahyoo.net>,
<yaioo.net>, <yauoo.net>, <yqhoo.net>
and <jpyahoo.net> domain names are registered with Onlinenic, Inc.
and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. Onlinenic, Inc. verified that Respondent is
bound by the Onlinenic, Inc. registration agreement and thereby has agreed to
resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with
ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").
On
August 16, 2005, Iholdings.com, Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar confirmed by e-mail to
the National Arbitration Forum that the <yyahoo.org>, <kryahoo.org>,
<yahio.org>, <yahoi.org>, <yahookr.org>,
<yahpo.org>, <yahpp.org>, <yajoo.org>, <yaahoo.org>,
<yaoo.org>, <yahoosex.org> and <wwwyahoo.org>
domain names are registered with Iholdings.com, Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar and
that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. Iholdings.com, Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar has
verified that Respondent is bound by the Iholdings.com, Inc. d/b/a Dotregistrar
registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes
brought by third parties in accordance with the Policy.
On
August 19, 2005, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative
Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of
September 8, 2005, by which Respondent could file a response to the Complaint,
was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and
persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative and
billing contacts, and to postmaster@yakoo.org, postmaster@yyahoo.org,
postmaster@kryahoo.org, postmaster@yahio.org, postmaster@yahoi.org,
postmaster@yahookr.org, postmaster@yahpo.org, postmaster@yahpp.org,
postmaster@yajoo.org, postmaster@yaahoo.org, postmaster@yaoo.org,
postmaster@yahoosex.org, postmaster@wwwyahoo.org, postmaster@aryahoo.net,
postmaster@auctionsyahoo.net, postmaster@auctions-yahoo.net, postmaster@auctionyahoo.net,
postmaster@auction-yahoo.net, postmaster@auyahoo.net, postmaster@ayhoo.org,
postmaster@blogyahoo.com, postmaster@bryahoo.net, postmaster@cayahoo.net,
postmaster@chinayahoo.net, postmaster@chineseyahoo.net, postmaster@ctyahoo.net,
postmaster@deyahoo.net, postmaster@dkyahoo.net, postmaster@espanolyahoo.net,
postmaster@esyahoo.net, postmaster@fryahoo.net, postmaster@gugiyahoo.com,
postmaster@hkyahoo.net, postmaster@inyahoo.net, postmaster@ityahoo.net,
postmaster@jpyahoo.com, postmaster@localyahoo.net, postmaster@mxyahoo.net,
postmaster@myahoo.net, postmaster@noyahoo.net, postmaster@seyahoo.net,
postmaster@sgyahoo.net, postmaster@twyahoo.net, postmaster@weatheryahoo.net,
postmaster@wwwahoo.net, postmaster@wwwayhoo.net, postmaster@wwwtahoo.net,
postmaster@wwwuahoo.net, postmaster@wwwwyahoo.net, postmaster@wwwyagoo.com,
postmaster@wwwyagoo.net, postmaster@wwwyah00.net, postmaster@wwwyahio.com,
postmaster@wwwyaho.net, postmaster@wwwyahoi.com, postmaster@wwwyahoo.net,
postmaster@wwwyahoocom.net, postmaster@wwwyahooo.net,
postmaster@wwwyahoosearch.net, postmaster@wwwyahop.com,
postmaster@wwwyahpo.com, postmaster@wwwyajoo.net, postmaster@wwwyhoo.net,
postmaster@wwyahoo.net, postmaster@wyahoo.net, postmaster@yahio.net,
postmaster@yahko.net, postmaster@yahlo.net, postmaster@ya-hoo.net,
postmaster@yahoocojp.com, postmaster@yahoocokr.com, postmaster@yahoocom.net,
postmaster@yahoocpm.com, postmaster@yahooe.net, postmaster@yahooi.org,
postmaster@yahookr.com, postmaster@yahoo-kr.com, postmaster@yahookr.net,
postmaster@yahoovacationsstore.com, postmaster@yahop.net, postmaster@yahpo.net,
postmaster@yahpp.net, postmaster@yahyoo.net, postmaster@yaioo.net,
postmaster@yauoo.net, postmaster@yqhoo.net and postmaster@jpyahoo.net by
e-mail.
Having
received no response from Respondent, the National Arbitration Forum
transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On
September 15, 2005, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute
decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Hon.
Carolyn Marks Johnson sits as Panelist.
Having
reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the
"Panel") finds that the National Arbitration Forum 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." Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision
based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN
Rules, the National Arbitration Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and
principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any
response from Respondent.
Complainant
requests that the domain names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant makes the following assertions:
1. The domain names that Respondent
registered, <yakoo.org>, <yyahoo.org>, <kryahoo.org>,
<yahio.org>, <yahoi.org>, <yahookr.org>,
<yahpo.org>, <yahpp.org>, <yajoo.org>, <yaahoo.org>,
<yaoo.org>, <yahoosex.org>, <wwwyahoo.org>,
<aryahoo.net>, <auctionsyahoo.net>, <auctions-yahoo.net>,
<auctionyahoo.net>, <auction-yahoo.net>, <auyahoo.net>,
<ayhoo.org>, <blogyahoo.com>, <bryahoo.net>,
<cayahoo.net>, <chinayahoo.net>, <chineseyahoo.net>,
<ctyahoo.net>, <deyahoo.net>, <dkyahoo.net>,
<espanolyahoo.net>, <esyahoo.net>, <fryahoo.net>,
<gugiyahoo.com>, <hkyahoo.net>, <inyahoo.net>,
<ityahoo.net>, <jpyahoo.com>, <localyahoo.net>,
<mxyahoo.net>, <myahoo.net>, <noyahoo.net>,
<seyahoo.net>, <sgyahoo.net>, <twyahoo.net>,
<weatheryahoo.net>, <wwwahoo.net>, <wwwayhoo.net>,
<wwwtahoo.net>, <wwwuahoo.net>, <wwwwyahoo.net>,
<wwwyagoo.com>, <wwwyagoo.net>, <wwwyah00.net>,
<wwwyahio.com>, <wwwyaho.net>, <wwwyahoi.com>,
<wwwyahoo.net>, <wwwyahoocom.net>, <wwwyahooo.net>,
<wwwyahoosearch.net>, <wwwyahop.com>, <wwwyahpo.com>,
<wwwyajoo.net>, <wwwyhoo.net>, <wwyahoo.net>,
<wyahoo.net>, <yahio.net>, <yahko.net>, <yahlo.net>,
<ya-hoo.net>, <yahoocojp.com>, <yahoocokr.com>,
<yahoocom.net>, <yahoocpm.com>, <yahooe.net>,
<yahooi.org>, <yahookr.com>, <yahoo-kr.com>,
<yahookr.net>, <yahoovacationsstore.com>, <yahop.net>,
<yahpo.net>, <yahpp.net>, <yahyoo.net>, <yaioo.net>,
<yauoo.net>, <yqhoo.net> and <jpyahoo.net>, are
confusingly similar to Complainant’s YAHOO mark.
2. Respondent has no rights to or legitimate
interests in the <yakoo.org>, <yyahoo.org>, <kryahoo.org>,
<yahio.org>, <yahoi.org>, <yahookr.org>,
<yahpo.org>, <yahpp.org>, <yajoo.org>, <yaahoo.org>,
<yaoo.org>, <yahoosex.org>, <wwwyahoo.org>,
<aryahoo.net>, <auctionsyahoo.net>, <auctions-yahoo.net>,
<auctionyahoo.net>, <auction-yahoo.net>, <auyahoo.net>,
<ayhoo.org>, <blogyahoo.com>, <bryahoo.net>,
<cayahoo.net>, <chinayahoo.net>, <chineseyahoo.net>,
<ctyahoo.net>, <deyahoo.net>, <dkyahoo.net>,
<espanolyahoo.net>, <esyahoo.net>, <fryahoo.net>,
<gugiyahoo.com>, <hkyahoo.net>, <inyahoo.net>,
<ityahoo.net>, <jpyahoo.com>, <localyahoo.net>,
<mxyahoo.net>, <myahoo.net>, <noyahoo.net>,
<seyahoo.net>, <sgyahoo.net>, <twyahoo.net>,
<weatheryahoo.net>, <wwwahoo.net>, <wwwayhoo.net>,
<wwwtahoo.net>, <wwwuahoo.net>, <wwwwyahoo.net>,
<wwwyagoo.com>, <wwwyagoo.net>, <wwwyah00.net>,
<wwwyahio.com>, <wwwyaho.net>, <wwwyahoi.com>,
<wwwyahoo.net>, <wwwyahoocom.net>, <wwwyahooo.net>,
<wwwyahoosearch.net>, <wwwyahop.com>, <wwwyahpo.com>,
<wwwyajoo.net>, <wwwyhoo.net>, <wwyahoo.net>,
<wyahoo.net>, <yahio.net>, <yahko.net>, <yahlo.net>,
<ya-hoo.net>, <yahoocojp.com>, <yahoocokr.com>,
<yahoocom.net>, <yahoocpm.com>, <yahooe.net>,
<yahooi.org>, <yahookr.com>, <yahoo-kr.com>,
<yahookr.net>, <yahoovacationsstore.com>, <yahop.net>,
<yahpo.net>, <yahpp.net>, <yahyoo.net>, <yaioo.net>,
<yauoo.net>, <yqhoo.net> and <jpyahoo.net> domain
names.
3. Respondent registered and used the <yakoo.org>,
<yyahoo.org>, <kryahoo.org>, <yahio.org>,
<yahoi.org>, <yahookr.org>, <yahpo.org>,
<yahpp.org>, <yajoo.org>, <yaahoo.org>, <yaoo.org>,
<yahoosex.org>, <wwwyahoo.org>,
<aryahoo.net>, <auctionsyahoo.net>, <auctions-yahoo.net>,
<auctionyahoo.net>, <auction-yahoo.net>, <auyahoo.net>,
<ayhoo.org>, <blogyahoo.com>, <bryahoo.net>,
<cayahoo.net>, <chinayahoo.net>, <chineseyahoo.net>,
<ctyahoo.net>, <deyahoo.net>, <dkyahoo.net>,
<espanolyahoo.net>, <esyahoo.net>, <fryahoo.net>,
<gugiyahoo.com>, <hkyahoo.net>, <inyahoo.net>,
<ityahoo.net>, <jpyahoo.com>, <localyahoo.net>,
<mxyahoo.net>, <myahoo.net>, <noyahoo.net>,
<seyahoo.net>, <sgyahoo.net>, <twyahoo.net>,
<weatheryahoo.net>, <wwwahoo.net>, <wwwayhoo.net>,
<wwwtahoo.net>, <wwwuahoo.net>, <wwwwyahoo.net>,
<wwwyagoo.com>, <wwwyagoo.net>, <wwwyah00.net>,
<wwwyahio.com>, <wwwyaho.net>, <wwwyahoi.com>,
<wwwyahoo.net>, <wwwyahoocom.net>, <wwwyahooo.net>,
<wwwyahoosearch.net>, <wwwyahop.com>, <wwwyahpo.com>,
<wwwyajoo.net>, <wwwyhoo.net>, <wwyahoo.net>,
<wyahoo.net>, <yahio.net>, <yahko.net>, <yahlo.net>,
<ya-hoo.net>, <yahoocojp.com>, <yahoocokr.com>,
<yahoocom.net>, <yahoocpm.com>, <yahooe.net>,
<yahooi.org>, <yahookr.com>, <yahoo-kr.com>,
<yahookr.net>, <yahoovacationsstore.com>, <yahop.net>,
<yahpo.net>, <yahpp.net>, <yahyoo.net>, <yaioo.net>,
<yauoo.net>, <yqhoo.net> and <jpyahoo.net>
domain names in bad faith.
B. Respondent failed to submit a Response in
this proceeding.
Complainant,
Yahoo! Inc., is a global Internet communications media and commerce company
that delivers a branded network of comprehensive search, directory,
information, communication and shopping services to millions of Internet users
daily.
Complainant
registered its YAHOO! mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office
(“USPTO”) (e.g., Reg. No. 2,040,222 issued February 25, 1997).
Respondent registered eighty-seven disputed domain names over a three-year
period between 2002 and 2005.
Respondent is using the disputed domain names to operate websites that
feature links to various third-party commercial websites.
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."
In view of
Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this
administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed
representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and
will draw such inferences as the Panel considers appropriate pursuant to
paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel
is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations and inferences set forth in
the Complaint as true unless the evidence is clearly contradictory. See Vertical Solutions Mgmt., Inc.
v. webnet-marketing, inc., FA 95095 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 31, 2000)
(holding that the respondent’s failure to respond allows all reasonable
inferences of fact in the allegations of the complaint to be deemed true); see
also Talk City, Inc. v. Robertson,
D2000-0009 (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000) (“In the absence of a response, it is
appropriate to accept as true all allegations of the Complaint.”).
Paragraph 4(a)
of the Policy requires Complainant to 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.
Complainant
established using extrinsic proof in this proceeding that it has rights in the
YAHOO! mark through registration of the mark with the USPTO. See Vivendi Universal Games v.
XBNetVentures Inc., FA 198803 (Nat. Arb. Forum Nov. 11, 2003)
(“Complainant's federal trademark registrations establish Complainant's rights
in the BLIZZARD mark.”); see also Janus
Int’l Holding Co. v. Rademacher, D2002-0201 (WIPO Mar. 5, 2002)
("Panel decisions have held that registration of a mark is prima facie evidence of validity, which
creates a rebuttable presumption that the mark is inherently
distinctive.").
Complainant
alleges that Respondent’s domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s
protected YAHOO! mark. Some of the
disputed domain names add letters or generic terms to Complainant’s famous
mark, while others are merely typosquatted variations of that mark. The Panel finds that Respondent’s various
alterations and additions to Complainant’s mark are not enough to prevent a
finding of confusing similarity pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Victoria’s Secret v. Zuccarini,
FA 95762 (Nat. Arb. Forum Nov. 18, 2000) (finding that, by misspelling words
and adding letters to words, a respondent does not create a distinct mark but
nevertheless renders the domain name confusingly similar to the complainant’s
marks); see also Arthur Guinness Son & Co. (Dublin) Ltd. v. Healy/BOSTH,
D2001-0026 (WIPO Mar. 23, 2001) (finding confusing similarity where the domain
name in dispute contains the identical mark of the complainant combined with a
generic word or term); see also Neiman Marcus
Group, Inc. v. Party Night, Inc., FA
114546 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 23, 2002) (finding that the <neimanmacus.com> domain name was a simple misspelling of the complainant’s NEIMAN
MARCUS mark and was a classic example of
typosquatting, which was evidence that the domain name was confusingly
similar to the mark).
The Panel finds
that Complainant satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).
Complainant
established that it has rights to and legitimate interests in the mark
contained within the disputed domain names. Complainant alleges that Respondent
has no such rights to or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names and
Respondent, in not submitting a response, has failed to rebut Complainant’s
assertion. Thus, the Panel may
interpret Respondent’s failure to respond as evidence that Respondent lacks
rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain names pursuant to Policy
¶ 4(a)(ii). See Parfums Christian Dior v. QTR Corp.,
D2000-0023 (WIPO Mar. 9, 2000) (finding that by not submitting a response, the
respondent has failed to invoke any circumstance which could demonstrate any
rights or legitimate interests in the domain name); see also Pavillion Agency, Inc. v. Greenhouse Agency
Ltd., D2000-1221 (WIPO Dec. 4, 2000) (finding that the respondents’ failure
to respond can be construed as an admission that they have no legitimate
interest in the domain names).
The Panel will
analyze whether Respondent could meet its burden of establishing rights or
legitimate interests for the purposes of Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). Respondent is using the confusingly similar
domain names to operate websites that feature links to various third-party
commercial websites, through which Respondent presumably earns referral fees. The Panel finds that such diversionary use
of the confusingly similar domain names is not a use in connection with a bona
fide offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) and it is
not a legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). See Bank of Am.
Corp. v. Nw. Free Cmty. Access, FA 180704
(Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 30, 2003) (“Respondent's demonstrated intent to divert
Internet users seeking Complainant's website to a website of Respondent and for
Respondent's benefit is not a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy
¶ 4(c)(i) and it is not a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶
4(c)(iii).”); see also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Dot Stop,
FA 145227 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 17, 2003) (finding that the respondent’s
diversionary use of the complainant’s mark to attract Internet users to its own
website, which contained a series of hyperlinks to unrelated websites, was
neither a bona fide offering of goods or services nor a legitimate
noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain names).
Furthermore,
nothing in the record indicates that Respondent is either commonly known by the
disputed domain names or authorized to use Complainant’s YAHOO! mark or
confusingly similar variations of that mark.
The Panel finds that Respondent has not established rights to or
legitimate interests in the disputed domain names pursuant to Policy ¶
4(c)(ii). See Gallup, Inc. v. Amish Country Store, FA
96209 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 23, 2001) (finding that the respondent does not
have rights in a domain name when the respondent is not known by the mark); see
also RMO, Inc. v. Burbridge, FA 96949 (Nat. Arb. Forum May 16, 2001) (interpreting
Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii) "to require a showing that one has been commonly known
by the domain name prior to registration of the domain name to prevail"); see
also Compagnie de Saint Gobain v.
Com-Union Corp., D2000-0020 (WIPO Mar. 14, 2000) (finding no rights or
legitimate interest where the respondent was not commonly known by the mark and
never applied for a license or permission from the complainant to use the
trademarked name).
Moreover, the
fact that many of Respondent’s domain names are merely typosquatted variations
of Complainant’s YAHOO! mark is evidence that Respondent lacks rights and
legitimate interests in the disputed domain names pursuant to Policy ¶
4(a)(ii). See IndyMac Bank F.S.B. v. Ebeyer, FA 175292 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 19, 2003) (finding that
respondent lacked rights and legitimate interests in the disputed
domain names because it “engaged in the practice of typosquatting
by taking advantage of Internet users who attempt to access Complainant's
<indymac.com> website but mistakenly misspell Complainant's mark by
typing the letter ‘x’ instead of the letter ‘c’”); see also LTD Commodities LLC v. Party Night, Inc., FA 165155 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 14,
2003) (finding that the <ltdcommadities.com>,
<ltdcommmodities.com>, and <ltdcommodaties.com> domain
names were intentional misspellings of Complainant's LTD COMMODITIES mark
and this “‘typosquatting’ is evidence that Respondent lacks rights or
legitimate interests in the disputed domain names”).
The Panel finds
that Complainant satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).
Respondent is
using the disputed domain names, which are confusingly similar to Complainant’s
YAHOO! mark, to operate websites that feature links to various third-party
commercial websites. The Panel infers
that Respondent receives referral fees for diverting Internet users to these
commercial websites. Thus, the Panel
concludes that Respondent is capitalizing on Internet user confusion and that
such use constitutes bad faith registration and use pursuant to Policy ¶
4(b)(iv). See G.D. Searle & Co.
v. Celebrex Drugstore, FA 123933 (Nat. Arb. Forum Nov. 21, 2002) (finding
that the respondent registered and used the domain name in bad faith pursuant
to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv) because the respondent was using the confusingly similar
domain name to attract Internet users to its commercial website); see also
Kmart v. Khan, FA 127708 (Nat. Arb. Forum Nov. 22, 2002) (finding that if
the respondent profits from its diversionary use of the complainant's mark when
the domain name resolves to commercial websites and the respondent fails to
contest the complaint, it may be concluded that the respondent is using the domain
name in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv)).
Furthermore,
Respondent registered the disputed domain names with actual or constructive
knowledge of Complainant’s YAHOO! mark due to Complainant’s registration of the
mark with the USPTO. Moreover, the
Panel infers that Respondent registered the domain names with actual knowledge
of Complainant’s mark due to the immense international fame associated with the
mark. Thus, the Panel concludes that
Respondent’s registration of the confusingly similar domain names, despite actual or constructive knowledge of
Complainant’s rights in the YAHOO! mark, is evidence of bad faith registration
and use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
See Digi Int’l v. DDI Sys., FA 124506 (Nat. Arb.
Forum Oct. 24, 2002) (“[T]here is a legal presumption of bad faith, when
Respondent reasonably should have been aware of Complainant’s trademarks,
actually or constructively”); see also Victoria’s
Cyber Secret Ltd. v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc., 161 F.Supp.2d 1339, 1349 (S.D.Fla. 2001) (noting that “a Principal
Register registration [of a trademark or service mark] is constructive notice
of a claim of ownership so as to eliminate any defense of good faith adoption”
pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1072); see also Ty Inc. v. Parvin, D2000-0688 (WIPO Nov. 9, 2000) (finding that the
respondent’s registration and use of an identical and/or confusingly similar
domain name was in bad faith where the complainant’s BEANIE BABIES mark was
famous and the respondent should have been aware of it).
Additionally,
the fact that many of Respondent’s domain names are typosquatted versions of
Complainant’s YAHOO! mark is evidence that Respondent registered and used the
disputed domain names in bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See Nat’l Ass’n of Prof’l Baseball
League, Inc. v. Zuccarini, D2002-1011 (WIPO Jan. 21, 2003) (“Typosquatting
… is the intentional misspelling of words with [the] intent to intercept and
siphon off traffic from its intended destination, by preying on Internauts who
make common typing errors.
Typosquatting is inherently parasitic and of itself evidence of bad
faith.”); see also Dermalogica, Inc.
v. Domains to Develop, FA 175201 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 22, 2003) (finding that the <dermatalogica.com>
domain name was a “simple misspelling” of the complainant's DERMALOGICA
mark which indicated typosquatting and bad faith pursuant to Policy 4(a)(iii)).
The Panel finds
that Complainant satisfied Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).
Having
established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel
concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it
is Ordered that the <yakoo.org>, <yyahoo.org>, <kryahoo.org>,
<yahio.org>, <yahoi.org>, <yahookr.org>,
<yahpo.org>, <yahpp.org>, <yajoo.org>, <yaahoo.org>,
<yaoo.org>, <yahoosex.org>, <wwwyahoo.org>,
<aryahoo.net>, <auctionsyahoo.net>, <auctions-yahoo.net>,
<auctionyahoo.net>, <auction-yahoo.net>, <auyahoo.net>,
<ayhoo.org>, <blogyahoo.com>, <bryahoo.net>,
<cayahoo.net>, <chinayahoo.net>, <chineseyahoo.net>,
<ctyahoo.net>, <deyahoo.net>, <dkyahoo.net>,
<espanolyahoo.net>, <esyahoo.net>, <fryahoo.net>,
<gugiyahoo.com>, <hkyahoo.net>, <inyahoo.net>,
<ityahoo.net>, <jpyahoo.com>, <localyahoo.net>,
<mxyahoo.net>, <myahoo.net>, <noyahoo.net>,
<seyahoo.net>, <sgyahoo.net>, <twyahoo.net>,
<weatheryahoo.net>, <wwwahoo.net>, <wwwayhoo.net>,
<wwwtahoo.net>, <wwwuahoo.net>, <wwwwyahoo.net>,
<wwwyagoo.com>, <wwwyagoo.net>, <wwwyah00.net>,
<wwwyahio.com>, <wwwyaho.net>, <wwwyahoi.com>,
<wwwyahoo.net>, <wwwyahoocom.net>, <wwwyahooo.net>,
<wwwyahoosearch.net>, <wwwyahop.com>, <wwwyahpo.com>,
<wwwyajoo.net>, <wwwyhoo.net>, <wwyahoo.net>,
<wyahoo.net>, <yahio.net>, <yahko.net>, <yahlo.net>,
<ya-hoo.net>, <yahoocojp.com>, <yahoocokr.com>,
<yahoocom.net>, <yahoocpm.com>, <yahooe.net>,
<yahooi.org>, <yahookr.com>, <yahoo-kr.com>,
<yahookr.net>, <yahoovacationsstore.com>, <yahop.net>,
<yahpo.net>, <yahpp.net>, <yahyoo.net>, <yaioo.net>,
<yauoo.net>, <yqhoo.net> and <jpyahoo.net>
domain names be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson, Panelist
Dated: September 28, 2005.
Click Here to return
to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home
Page
National Arbitration Forum