Coachella Music Festival, LLC v. Tutor U
Claim Number: FA2005001895607
Complainant is Coachella Music Festival, LLC (“Complainant”), represented by David J. Steele of Tucker Ellis, LLP, California, United States. Respondent is Tutor U (“Respondent”), Florida, United States.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <lastminutecoachella.com>, registered with NameCheap, Inc..
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.
Richard Hill as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on May 10, 2020; the Forum received payment on May 10, 2020.
On May 11, 2020, NameCheap, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <lastminutecoachella.com> domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. NameCheap, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the NameCheap, Inc. 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 May 12, 2020, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of June 1, 2020 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@lastminutecoachella.com. Also on May 12, 2020, 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.
Having received no response from Respondent, the Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default. Respondent did however send an e-mail to the Forum, see below.
On June 5, 2020, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Richard Hill 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 name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
A. Complainant
Complainant states that it owns and produces the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival. Held annually at the 78-acre Empire Polo Club in the beautiful Southern California desert, Coachella is one of the most critically acclaimed music festivals in the world. The first Coachella festival, held in October 1999, drew some 25,000 attendees into the California desert a few hours’ drive from Los Angeles, in Indio, California. Over the years1, both the festival’s attendance and its prominence within the music industry have grown. Attendance to the sold-out event aggregated over the multi-day festival is estimated at nearly 600,000 attendees. For the past several years, passes to Coachella have typically sold out in about an hour. Coachella mixes some of the most groundbreaking artists from all genres of music along with a substantial selection of art installations from all over the world. The Festival attracts some of the world’s biggest mega-stars to perform. The list of artists who have performed include: Beastie Boys, Beyoncé, Bjork, Coldplay, Daft Punk, Depeche Mode, Drake, Jane’s Addiction, Jay-Z, Kanye West, Madonna, Nine Inch Nails, Oasis, Paul McCartney, Prince, Radiohead, Rage Against the Machine, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Roger Waters, The Cure, The Pixies, and Tool, to list only a very few. To be sure, Coachella is about more than the music. The festival’s venue also includes camping facilities for some 15,000 attendees (complete with a karaoke lounge and a general store), and an amazing selection of food and beverages from a wide range of restaurants. Coachella also features an art exhibit which includes many pieces of art (including sculpture and so-called “interactive” art). Taken together, the music, the food, the art, and of course, the fellowship of other attendees, the Festival is more than just a concert to attend—it truly is an experience. Complainant asserts rights in the COACHELLA mark through its registration of the mark in the United States in 2007.
Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its COACHELLA mark as it incorporates the mark in its entirety and merely adds the descriptive phrase “last minute” along with the “.com” generic top-level domain (“gTLD”).
According to Complainant, Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and is not authorized or permitted to use Complainant’s COACHELLA mark. Additionally, Respondent fails to use the disputed domain name in connection to a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Rather, Respondent uses the disputed domain name to host sponsored links.
Further, says Complainant, Respondent registered and uses the disputed domain name in bad faith. Respondent uses the disputed domain name to host hyperlinks for financial gain. Additionally, registration of a domain name that is obviously connected to Complainant’s mark is evidence of bad faith.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. In its e-mail to the Forum, Respondent states, in pertinent part:
I am a 27-year-old web developer who works in tech in Silicon Valley, and I registered this domain over a year ago because of a keyword idea I thought of for visiting the Coachella region of California. I never had any intention of using this site to compete and sell items related to the Coachella Music Festival. Instead, it was meant to be a travel website that would share information on where to stay in the Coachella Valley region. I myself am an avid fan of the Coachella Music Festival, and I've attended the past 3 years (hopefully the event will happen this October!).
I never built a website for this domain to sell Coachella items or a "parking page" as is stated in the documents you shared. In fact I just ran a search for the domain and it returns a blank web page (see my image below). I never made any money from this website, although I lost money from paying registration fees.
Anyway, as a professional web developer and yearly Coachella Music Festival goer, I never meant to cause any problems with this domain name I registered. I'll happily transfer the domain to the Complainant and remove myself from ownership.
For the reasons set forth below, the Panel will not make any findings of fact.
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.
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."
In the present case, the parties have both asked for the domain name to be transferred to the Complainant. In accordance with a general legal principle governing arbitrations as well as national court proceedings, this Panel holds that it cannot act nec ultra petita nec infra petita, that is, that it cannot issue a decision that would be either less than requested, nor more than requested by the parties. 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 Malev Hungarian Airlines, Ltd. v. Vertical Axis Inc., FA 212653 (Forum Jan. 13, 2004); see also 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 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.”).
For the reasons set forth above, the Panel will not analyze this element of the Policy.
For the reasons set forth above, the Panel will not analyze this element of the Policy.
For the reasons set forth above, the Panel will not analyze this element of the Policy.
Given the common request of the Parties, it is Ordered that the <lastminutecoachella.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Richard Hill, Panelist
Dated: June 5, 2020
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page