P. O. Box 50191
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55405 USA
www.arbitration-forum.com


DECISION

FORUM FILE FA 0004000094424

 

TECHNOLOGY PROPERTIES, INC.

Complainant,

Vs.

RALPH BURRIS

Respondent.

 

The above-entitled matter came on for an administrative hearing on May 9, 2000 before the undersigned on the Complaint of Technology Properties, Inc., hereafter "Complainant", against Ralph Burris, hereafter "Respondent". Neither party is represented by counsel and Respondent did not file a response to the Complaint.

 

PROCEDURAL FINDINGS

Domain Name: RADIOSHACK.NET

Domain Name Registrar: Network Solutions, Inc.

Domain Name Registrant: Ralph Burris.

Date of Domain Name Registration: December 29, 1997.

Date Complaint Filed: April 10,2000.

Date of Commencement of Administrative Proceeding in Accordance with Rule 2(a)[1] and Rule 4(c): April 13, 2000.

Due date for a response: May 4, 2000.

Respondent did not file a response as required by Rule 5(a).

After reviewing the Complaint and determining it to be in administrative compliance, the NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM (THE FORUM) forwarded the Complaint to the Respondent on April 13, 2000 in compliance with Rule 2(a), and the administrative proceeding was commenced pursuant to Rule 4(c). In compliance with Rule 4(d), The Forum immediately notified Network Solutions, Inc., the INTERNET CORPORATION FOR ASSIGNEDNAMES AND NUMBERS (ICANN) and the Respondent that the administrative proceeding had commenced. Respondent did not file a response as required by Rule 5(a).

On December 29, 1997, Respondent registered the domain name RADIOSHACK.NET with Domain Name Registrar Network Solutions, Inc., the entity that is the Registrar of the domain name. On April 13, 2000, Network Solutions, Inc. verified that Respondent is the Registrant for the domain name RADIOSHACK.NET and that further, by registering its domain name with Network Solutions, Inc., Respondent agreed to resolve any dispute regarding its domain name through ICANN's Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy and the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy.

 

FINDINGS OF FACT

The undisputed evidence establishes that:

    1. Complainant, which is a wholly owned subsidary of Tandy Corporation, owns the trademark RADIOSHACK and licenses the trademark to Radio Shack, a division of Tandy Corporation.
    2. Radio Shack has the domain name RADIOSHACK.COM.
    3. The only difference in the domain name RADIOSHACK.NET from the trademark RADIOSHACK is the use of .net domain.
    4. Radio Shack or its predecessors have used the two-word mark Radio Shack since 1924.
    5. Radio Shack has been using the single word RADIOSHACK trademark since 1995.
    6. Radio Shack is a well-known mark for products and services worldwide.
    7. Radio Shack currently has 3 trademark registrations and 4 applications for the mark "Radio Shack" or variations.
    8. Use of the radioshack.net domain name is identical and confusingly similar to the RadioShack.com domain name and specifically uses Complainant's registered trademark.
    9. Respondent has not offered any evidence of a right or legitimate interest in the name radioshack.net.
    10. Respondent's failure to respond to the Complaint permits the inference that the use of the Complaint's identical name is misleading and that Respondent intentionally is diverting business from Complainant for the sale of goods or services.
    11. The long-standing use of the name Radio Shack by Complaint for products and services worldwide allows the inference that Respondent had actual or constructive notice as a competitor of the prior use of the mark and name.
    12. The following is evidence of Respondent's bad faith in registering the domain name radioshack.net.
      1. Contrary to ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, Paragraph 4(b)(iii), Respondent wrongfully registered the domain name radioshack.net primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor although Respondent knew or should have known that the domain name registration radioshack.net would disrupt the business of an entity already using the identical name in the same general competitive market, and
      2. Contrary to ICANN's Uniform Domain Dispute Resolution Policy, Paragraph 4(b)(iv), Respondent, without and established legitimate basis for doing so, used the domain name to attract, for commercial gain, internet users to Respondent's web site or other on line location, and Respondent intentionally created a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as being a source, sponsor, affiliate, or endorser of Respondent's web site.

Complainant's prayer for relief requests that the domain name radioshack.net be transferred to Complainant pursuant to Paragraph 4(I) of ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy.

 

CONCLUSIONS

The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and has no know conflict of interest to serve as the Arbitrator in this proceeding. Having been duly selected, and being impartial, the undersigned makes the following conclusions.

  1. The domain name "radioshack.net" is identical and confusingly similar to the mark of the Complainant in which the Respondent has no right or legitimate interests.

    2.  

  2. Respondent registered and used the domain name in question in bad faith in that it registered said name for the purpose of disrupting the business of the Complainant or, by using the domain name, Respondent attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its Web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship affiliation, or endorsement or location of a product or service.

 

DECISION

Based on the foregoing, and pursuant to Rule 4(I), it is decided the undersigned directs that the DOMAIN NAME "radioshack.net" be transferred to Complainant Technology Properties, Inc.

Dated: May 9, 2000, by Judge Daniel B. Banks, Jr. (Ret.), Arbitrator