Google, LLC. v. PRIVATE PRIVATE / Bas Brouwer
Claim Number: FA1810001811856
Complainant is Google LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Chantal Z. Hwang of Cooley LLP, California, USA. Respondent is PRIVATE PRIVATE / Bas Brouwer (“Respondent”), Netherlands.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAMES
The domain names at issue are <gmailsigninemail.com> and <gmail-sign-in.net>, registered with NameCheap, Inc.; Realtime Register B.V..
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.
Steven M. Levy, Esq. as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on October 15, 2018; the Forum received payment on October 15, 2018.
On October 18, 2018, NameCheap, Inc.; Realtime Register B.V. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <gmail-sign-in.net> domain name is registered with Realtime Register B.V and the <gmailsigninemail.com> domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the names. NameCheap, Inc.; Realtime Register B.V. has verified that Respondent is bound by the NameCheap, Inc.; Realtime Register B.V. 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 October 26, 2018, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of November 15, 2018 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@gmailsigninemail.com, postmaster@gmail-sign-in.net. Also on October 26, 2018, 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 12, 2018.
On November 14, 2018, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Steven M. Levy, Esq. 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. 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 names be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant, Google LLC, has used the GMAIL mark in connection with the provision of email and electronic messaging services since 2004. Complainant has rights in the GMAIL mark based upon its registration with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) and many other national trademark offices. Respondent’s <gmailsigninemail.com> and <gmail-sign-in.net> domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark because Respondent includes the entire mark in the disputed domain names along with the descriptive terms “sign-in” and “email.”
Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the <gmailsigninemail.com> and <gmail-sign-in.net> domain names because it is not authorized by Complainant to use the mark in any way. Furthermore, Respondent fails to use the disputed domain names in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services or for a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Instead, Respondent attempts to pass itself off as Complainant and phishes for Internet users’ personal information. Additionally, Respondent advertises itself to offer technical support services to users of Complainant’s GMAIL email service.
Respondent registered and uses the <gmailsigninemail.com> and <gmail-sign-in.net> domain names in bad faith because it attempts to commercially gain by offering competing goods and services. Furthermore, Respondent’s bad faith behavior is demonstrated by its registration of multiple domain names that contain the GMAIL mark. Additionally, Respondent attempts to phish for Internet users personal information. Finally, Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in the mark prior to registering the disputed domain name.
B. Respondent
Respondent states that “I am just a student that likes Gmail as a service and I wanted to create informing blogs about this service, with the focus on helping Gmail users. Note that, as opposed to what is stated in the case files, the websites were NOT used to gain access to any Gmail account. The website only existed of pure text, images, YouTube videos and hyperlinks to the real Gmail website. Thus, no such software or contact forms or login forms (which would have possibly enabled the webmaster to gain access to any Gmail account) were available on the website.” Nevertheless, Respondent goes on to say “I agree with Google’s request that the domains … may be transferred to Google.”
In light of the Respondent’s consent to transfer of the disputed domain names, the Panel declines to make any findings on the substance of the facts and issues of this case.
Respondent consents to a transfer of the <gmailsigninemail.com> and <gmail-sign-in.net> domain names to Complainant. However, after the initiation of this proceeding, the concerned registrars NameCheap, Inc. and Realtime Register B.V. each placed a hold on Respondent’s accounts and therefore Respondent cannot transfer the disputed domain names while this proceeding is still pending. As a result, the Panel finds that in a circumstance such as this, where Respondent has not contested the transfer of the disputed domain names but instead agrees to transfer the domain names in question to Complainant, the Panel decides to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order an immediate transfer of the <gmailsigninemail.com> and <gmail-sign-in.net> domain names. See Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GmbH v. Modern Ltd. – Cayman Web Dev., FA 133625 (Forum Jan. 9, 2003) (transferring the domain name registration where the respondent stipulated to the transfer); see also Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Forum Jan. 13, 2004) (“In this case, the parties have both asked for the domain name to be transferred to the Complainant . . . Since the requests of the parties in this case are identical, the Panel has no scope to do anything other than to recognize the common request, and it has no mandate to make findings of fact or of compliance (or not) with the Policy.”); see also Disney Enters., Inc. v. Morales, FA 475191 (Forum June 24, 2005) (“[U]nder such circumstances, where Respondent has agreed to comply with Complainant’s request, the Panel felt it to be expedient and judicial to forego the traditional UDRP analysis and order the transfer of the domain names.”).
Respondent having consented to the transfer of the disputed domain names, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <gmailsigninemail.com> and <gmail-sign-in.net> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Steven M. Levy, Esq., Panelist
Dated: November 16, 2018
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page