NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM
URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION


Deutsche Lufthansa AG v. Whois Privacy Protection Service by onamae.com
Claim Number: FA1409001580504


DOMAIN NAME

<staralliance.yokohama>
 <star-alliance.yokohama>


PARTIES


   Complainant: Deutsche Lufthansa AG of Frankfurt, Germany
  
Complainant Representative: Rauschhofer Rechtsanwälte Dr. Hajo Rauschhofer of Wiesbaden, Germany

   Respondent: Whois Privacy Protection Service by onamae.com Whois Privacy onamae.com of Shibuya-ku, Tokyo, II, JP
  

REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS


   Registries: GMO Registry, Inc.
   Registrars:

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.
   Ms. Kateryna Oliinyk, as Examiner

PROCEDURAL HISTORY


   Complainant Submitted: September 19, 2014
   Commencement: September 22, 2014
   Default Date: October 7, 2014
   Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the National Arbitration 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: This complaint and findings relate to two domains <staralliance.yokohama> and <star-alliance.yokohama>. There is one Complainant against one Respondent involved in this proceeding. No domain names are dismissed from this Complaint. “STARALLIANCE”, headquartered in Frankfurt/Germany, is the world’s first and largest airline alliance and offers customers worldwide. Overall, the STARALLIANCE network offers more than 18,504 daily flights to 1,316 destinations in 192 countries. STARALLIANCE offers a bonus Program in connection with a card and credit card. STARALLIANCE and LUFTHANSA are famous and well-known trademarks operating worldwide. “STARALLIANCE” is the registered trademark and the Complainant holds valid international registration of the mark.

  

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:
  (i) for which the Complainant holds a valid national or regional registration and that is in current use; or
  (ii) that has been validated through court proceedings; or
  (iii) that is specifically protected by a statute or treaty in effect at the time the URS complaint is filed.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


The Examiner finds that the domain names <staralliance.yokohama> and <star-alliance.yokohama> fully incorporate the Complainant’s mark, and the “-“ sign between the elements “star” and “alliance” in the domain name <star-alliance.yokohama> may be neglected as this element does not preclude confusion between a domain name and the Complainant’s STARALLIANCE mark. In addition, it is well accepted that the top level domain is irrelevant in assessing identity or confusing similarity, thus the “.yokohama” is of no consequence here. The Examiner finds that the domain name <staralliance.yokohama> is identical to the Complainant’s STARALLIANCE mark, and the domain name <star-alliance.yokohama> is misleadingly similar to the Complainant’s STARALLIANCE mark under URS 1.2.6.1. (i).


[URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


It is contemplated from the Complaint that Respondent has no connection or affiliation with Complainant and has not received any license or consent, express or implied, to use Complainant’s STARALLIANCE mark in a domain name or otherwise. The domain name is neither generic nor descriptive, and the Respondent is not commonly known by the domain name. The passive holding of the domain name does not generate the legitimate interest in the domain name. Factoring that the Respondent defaulted to assert defenses to the Complaint to demonstrate his rights or legitimate interest in the domain name, the Examiner finds that the Respondent has not established any rights or legitimate interests in the domain names <staralliance.yokohama> and <star-alliance.yokohama> under URS 1.2.6.2.


[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
  a. Registrant has registered or 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 documented out-of pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or
  b. Registrant has registered the domain name in order to prevent the trademark holder or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that Registrant has engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
  c. Registrant registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
  d. By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’s 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 of Registrant’s web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location.

Determined: Finding for Complainant 


The domain names <staralliance.yokohama> and <star-alliance.yokohama> were registered and is being used in bad faith. The Complainant submits that the Respondent is using the domain names <staralliance.yokohama> and <star-alliance.yokohama> in bad faith as the Registrant's use of <staralliance.yokohama> and <star-alliance.yokohama> would almost certainly cause users to believe there is an affiliation or sponsorship with Complainant. Factoring the long and extensive use of the STARALLIANCE mark which is globally well-known mark, the Examiner further finds that Respondent had actual knowledge of the mark and Complainant's rights. Thus, the Examiner finds that the domain name is registered and used in bad faith under URS 1.2.6.3. as a non-exhaustive list of what constitutes bad faith registration and use (URS 1.2.3.6.(d)) indicates that bad faith exists when by using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’s 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 of Registrant’s web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location.


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:


  1. The Complaint was neither abusive nor contained material falsehoods. 

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:

  1. staralliance.yokohama
  2. star-alliance.yokohama

 

Ms. Kateryna Oliinyk
Examiner
Dated: October 9, 2014

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page