Complainant is Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft, Wolfsburg, Germany ("Complainant") represented by Stephen J. Arpaia of IP Protector, Rochester, New York. Respondent is Iggi Networks, Inc., Boca Raton, Florida ("Respondent").

The domain name at issue is <vwmail.com>, registered with Network Solutions, Inc.

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.

John J. Upchurch as Panelist.

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum (the "Forum") electronically on July 17, 2001; the Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on July 20, 2001.

On July 23, 2001, Network Solutions, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the domain name <vwmail.com> is registered with Network Solutions, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Network Solutions, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Network Solutions, Inc. 5.0 registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").

On July 24, 2001, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of August 13, 2001 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@vwmail.com by e-mail.

Having received no Response from Respondent, using the same contact details and methods as were used for the Commencement Notification, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.

On August 15, 2001, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed John J. Upchurch 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." Therefore, the Panel may issue its Decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the 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 name be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.

A. Complainant

B. Respondent

Complainant manufactures and sells motor vehicles, parts, and accessories for motor vehicles.

Complainant registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office the letters VW as a trademark and service mark. Complainant holds several incontestable trademark and service mark registrations for this VW mark.

The VW mark has appeared prominently in television, newspaper, magazine, outdoor billboard, and Internet advertising in the United States and throughout the world. By virtue of the long-standing use, voluminous and continuous advertising and strong consumer recognition, the VW mark has become a very distinctive and famous mark.

Complainant licenses authorized distributors to use Complainant’s VW marks in connection with VW dealerships. Great care is exercised in the selection of these licensees and substantial efforts are exerted to control the nature and quality of the goods and services in connection with which the said licensees. Respondent is not an authorized licensee and has never been approved to use Complainant’s VW mark.

Respondent registered the domain name VWMAIL.COM on December 22, 2000.

Respondent is engaged in the practice of registering domain names, including domain names incorporating trademarks, and selling them. According to the statistics on Afternic.com, a well-known domain name auction web site, Respondent is currently auctioning 1377 different domain names, including the domain name at issue, JETTAMAIL.COM, and PENTHOUSE24.COM.

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 the Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules.

Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that the Complainant must 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 the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;

(2) the 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.

Due to Complainant’s long use, extensive advertising, and trademark and service mark registrations, the general public and business communities know the Complainant as "VW." Thus, Complainant has rights in the "VW" mark. Any use by a third party of the name "VW," or as in the present case <vwmail.com>, causes confusion and deception in the minds of the trade and public and gives the impression that it is a reference to the Complainant. Further, prior UDRP panels have held that such additions of generic words to established marks satisfies the confusingly similar test set forth in Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Broadcom Corp. v. Domain Depot, FA 96854 (Nat. Arb. Forum Apr. 23, 2001) (finding the <broadcomonline.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s BROADCOM mark); Christie’s Inc. v. Tiffany’s Jewelry Auction Inc., D2001-0075 (WIPO Mar. 6, 2001) (finding that the domain name "christiesauction.com" is confusingly similar to the Complainant's mark since it merely adds the word "auction" used in its generic sense).

Given these reasons, the Panel holds that the Complainant has met the burden set forth in Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).

Respondent has never used the domain name in question in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services. Respondent is not commonly known by the name vwmail or <vwmail.com>, nor is the Respondent engaged in any business or other organization commonly known by any of the above. Rather, Respondent is using the domain name as a part of a larger ploy of registering domain names containing marks owned by others and then offering the domain names for sale at exorbitant prices. Such conduct is not protected under the UDRP. See J. Paul Getty Trust v. Domain 4 Sale & Co., FA 95262 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 7, 2000) (finding rights or legitimate interests do not exist when one has made no use of the websites that are located at the domain names at issue, other than to sell the domain names for profit).

Considering the above, in addition to Respondent’s failure to offer a response in this dispute, the Panel concludes that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the said domain name. The Panel holds that the Complainant has met the burden set forth in Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii).

Complainant has offered proof that <vwmail.com> is being offered for sale on Afternic.com, an online auction clearinghouse. Complainant contends this conduct is evidence of Respondent’s bad faith regsitration and use of the domain name.

Policy ¶ 4(b)(i), as evidence of bad faith, states: "circumstances indicating that you have registered or you have acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of your documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name."

The Panel holds that such general offers of sale, as the conduct in question, are evidence of bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(b)(i). See Educational Testing Serv. v. TOEFL, D2000-0044 (WIPO Mar. 16, 2000) (finding that a general offer of sale combined with no legitimate use of the domain name constitutes registration and use in bad faith). Respondent’s calculated effort to sell the domain dame "vwmail.com" at the Afternic.com auction site demonstrates that Respondent registered and is using the domain name in bad faith. See Wrenchead.com, Inc. v. Hammersla, D2000-1222 (WIPO Dec. 12, 2000) (finding that offering the domain name for sale at an auction site is evidence of bad faith registration and use).

Given these reasons, the Panel holds that the Complainant has met the burden set forth in Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).

Having established all three elements required by the ICANN Policy Rule 4(a), it is the decision of the panel that the requested relief be granted.

Accordingly, for all of the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that the domain name <vwmail.com> be transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.

John J. Upchurch, Panelist

Dated: August 17, 2001