Licensing IP International S.à r.l. v. REDACTED PRIVACY
Claim Number: FA1904001839622
Complainant: Licensing IP International S.à r.l. of Luxembourg, Luxembourg.
Complainant Representative: EuroDNS SA of Leudelange, Luxembourg.
Respondent: PrivacyDotLink Customer 3670577 of Seven Mile Beach, Grand Cayman, International, KY.
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: Binky Moon, LLC
Registrars: Uniregistrar Corp
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.
Omar Haydar, as Examiner.
Complainant submitted: April 19, 2019
Commencement: April 19, 2019
Default Date: May 10, 2019
Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the 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") .
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.
Clear and convincing evidence.
The complaint and findings relate to one domain <brazzers.wtf>. There is one Complainant and an unknown Respondent, and no domain names were dismissed from this Complaint.
The Respondent has registered the domain name <brazzers.wtf>.
Complainant is the owner of trademark brazzers, which has been registered in various jurisdictions since 2007.
Complainant has claimed that the domain name in question is identical to their protected word or 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:
The Examiner finds that Complainant has proven that the domain name is identical through evidence of the trademark registration. The Complainant’s trademark is registered in a number of jurisdictions and has been in use at least 12 years.
The Examiner further finds that Complainant has proven that Respondent has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. The Complainant has neither licensed the trademark to the Respondent for use, nor has the Respondent made any claim to a legitimate right or interest to the name.
The Examiner finds that the evidence proves the domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith. The Complainant has provided evidence that the website in question utilizes the protected mark without authorization in offering identical services to the Complainant.
After reviewing the Complainant’s 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 names be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration.
Omar Haydar, Examiner
Dated: May 10, 2019
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page