Screen Actors Guild-American Federation Of Television And Radio Artists v. Erin Souza / Singer Associates
Claim Number: FA1611001701320
Complainant is Screen Actors Guild-American Federation Of Television And Radio Artists (“Complainant”), represented by Stephen J. Strauss of BUCHALTER NEMER, California, USA. Respondent is Erin Souza / Singer Associates (“Respondent”), represented by Kenneth D. Suzan of Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Minnesota, USA.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The domain names at issue are <sagaftravideogames.com> and <sagaftravideogames.org>, 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.
Bruce E. Meyerson as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on November 3, 2016; the Forum received payment on November 3, 2016.
On November 4, 2016, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <sagaftravideogames.com> and <sagaftravideogames.org> domain names are registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. 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 November 8, 2016, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of November 28, 2016 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@sagaftravideogames.com, postmaster@sagaftravideogames.org. Also on November 8, 2016, 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 November 28, 2016.
On November 30, 2017, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Bruce E. Meyerson 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.
Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
1. Complainant has rights in the SAG-AFTRA mark through its registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (Reg. No. 4,327,043, registered on April 30, 2013). Respondent’s <sagaftravideogames.com> and <sagaftravideogames.org> domain names are confusingly similar to the SAG-AFTRA mark because they each contain the mark, along with the generic term “video games” and a generic top-level domain (“gTLD”).
2. Respondent is not commonly known by the <sagaftravideogames.com> and <sagaftravideogames.org> domain names as it is not connected to Complainant or otherwise permitted to use the SAG-AFTRA mark.
3. Respondent fails to provide a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use because the <sagaftravideogames.com> domain name resolves to a website critical of Complainant that displays Complainant’s SAG-AFTRA mark while the <sagaftravideogames.org> domain name resolves to a parked page with links unrelated to Complainant.
4. Respondent has demonstrated a pattern of bad faith domain name registrations by registering the multiple domain names at issue here and for the foregoing reasons as well.
5. Respondent registered the domain names in bad faith because it did so with actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the SAG-AFTRA mark.
B. Respondent
Respondent believes it is making a fair use of the domain names as part of a labor dispute, but nevertheless has agreed to transfer the domain names to the Complainant.
Respondent consents to transfer the domain names to the Complainant.
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."
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that 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 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.
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page