Quora, Inc. v. Sachin Ramola
Claim Number: FA1711001758709
Complainant is Quora, Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by Laura M. Franco of Winston & Strawn LLP, California, USA. Respondent is Sachin Ramola ("Respondent"), India.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <quorate.in>, 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.
David E. Sorkin as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on November 15, 2017; the Forum received payment on November 15, 2017.
On November 15, 2017, the Forum contacted GoDaddy.com, LLC, requesting verification of the domain name registration data and related information, including confirmation that ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "ICANN Policy") applies. On November 16, 2017, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by email to the Forum that the <quorate.in> domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. The verification response did not include any reference to the ICANN Policy.
On November 20, 2017, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of December 11, 2017 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via email to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@quorate.in. Also on November 20, 2017, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the email 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.
Having received no response from Respondent, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On December 14, 2017, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed David E. Sorkin 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 "ICANN 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. 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 Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant operates a platform that includes a collaborative information-sharing and learning website and related mobile apps and services. Complainant has used the QUORA mark in connection with this platform since 2010. The platform has more than 200 million unique monthly visitors, approximately half of which are in the United States. Complainant asserts that its QUORA mark has become widely recognized worldwide based on this longstanding and widespread use. Complainant owns trademark registrations for the QUORA mark in the United States, India, and other jurisdictions worldwide.
Respondent registered the disputed domain name <quorate.in> in January 2017. The disputed domain name is being used for a website that offers a question-and-answer service similar to and in apparent competition with that offered by Complainant. The website uses a red and white color scheme, similar to that used by Complainant's site, and contains the term "Quorate" in a style similar to that of Complainant's QUORA logo:
Complainant states that Respondent is not commonly known by the QUORA mark beyond its incorporation in the disputed domain name, and alleges that the domain name was chosen specifically because of its confusing similarity to Complainant's mark. Complainant states that it has not given Respondent any license, permission, or other authorization to use its QUORA mark or the disputed domain name.
On these grounds Complainant contends that the disputed domain name <quorate.in> is confusingly similar to Complainant's QUORA mark; that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name; and that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
The Panel finds that the registration of the disputed domain name is not governed by the ICANN Policy.
The ICANN Policy is incorporated by reference into registration agreements for most domain names, including those in global top-level domains (gTLDs) like ".com" and many country-code top-level domains (ccTLDs). Domain name registrants thereby agree to participate in proceedings brought under the ICANN Policy, and are bound by decisions made in such proceedings. However, not all ccTLDs have adopted the ICANN Policy. The ".in" gTLD, for example, has adopted the .IN Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (INDRP), which is similar but not identical to ICANN's Policy. Perhaps most importantly for purposes of this proceeding, the INDRP Rules of Procedure require that complaints be brought before the .IN Registry rather than before an ICANN-approved dispute resolution provider such as the Forum.
Because these policies are creatures of contract, the Panel notes the possibility that both the INDRP and ICANN's Policy might conceivably apply concurrently to a particular domain name registration. The registration agreement used by a domain name registrar such as GoDaddy.com, LLC could incorporate a dispute resolution policy other than or in addition to that required by ICANN or the registry.
The record before the Panel here does not include a copy of the GoDaddy.com, LLC registration agreement, let alone a copy of that agreement in the form it took when the disputed domain name in this proceeding was registered. (The version of the agreement currently posted on GoDaddy's website was last revised on November 29, 2017.) And the verification message that the Forum received from GoDaddy.com, LLC does not indicate which dispute resolution policy, if any, is applicable.
The Panel concludes that the registration of the disputed domain name <quorate.in> does not appear to be governed by the ICANN Policy, and the Panel therefore lacks jurisdiction over this matter.
Having determined that the ICANN Policy does not apply, the Panel Orders that the proceeding be DISMISSED.
David E. Sorkin, Panelist
Dated: December 27, 2017
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page