Princess Cruises Lines, Ltd. v. Aleksandr Yamshikov / Private person
Claim Number: FA2005001898334
Complainant is Princess Cruises Lines, Ltd. (“Complainant”), represented by Brett A. August of Pattishall, McAuliffe, Newbury, Hilliard & Geraldson LLP, Illinois, USA. Respondent is Aleksandr Yamshikov / Private person (“Respondent”), Kyrgyzstan.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <princesscovid-19.com>, registered with Regtime Ltd.
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.
Alan L. Limbury, as Panelist.
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on May 29, 2020; the Forum received payment on May 29, 2020. The Complaint was received in both Russian and English.
On June 2, 2020, Regtime Ltd. confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <princesscovid-19.com> domain name is registered with Regtime Ltd. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Regtime Ltd. has verified that Respondent is bound by the Regtime Ltd. registration agreement, which is in the Russian language, 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 June 4, 2020, the Forum served the Russian language Complaint and all Annexes, including a Russian language Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of June 24, 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@princesscovid-19.com. Also on June 4, 2020, the Russian language 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.
On June 30, 2020, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Alan L. Limbury 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, Princess Cruises Lines, Ltd., is a recognized cruise line provider. Complainant asserts rights in the PRINCESS and PRINCESS CRUISES marks through their registration with multiple trademark agencies, including the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). Respondent’s <princesscovid-19.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s PRINCESS mark as it fully incorporates the mark in its entirety, merely adding the term “covid-19” and the “.com” generic top-level domain (“gTLD”).
Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the <princesscovid-19.com> domain name. Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and Complainant has not authorized Respondent’s use of the PRINCESS 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 domain name in a phishing scheme.
Respondent registered and uses the <princesscovid-19.com> domain name in bad faith. Respondent uses the domain name to obtain information in a phishing scheme. Respondent’s use also signals that Respondent had knowledge of Complainants rights in the mark at the time of registration.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
Complainant has established all the elements entitling it to relief.
PRELIMINARY ISSUE: LANGUAGE OF THE PROCEEDING
Paragraph 11(a) of the Rules provides:
"[u]nless otherwise agreed by the Parties, or specified otherwise in the Registration Agreement, the language of the administrative proceeding shall be the language of the Registration Agreement, subject to the authority of the Panel to determine otherwise, having regard to the circumstances of the administrative proceeding".
Paragraph 10(c) of the Rules provides that "[T]he Panel shall ensure that the administrative proceeding takes place with due expedition."
The Registration Agreement in this case is in Russian. The Respondent’s domain name <princesscovid-19.com> comprises English characters and words and resolves to a web page displaying English characters and words, suggesting that Respondent is proficient in the English language.
Respondent was notified in Russian by the Forum of the nature and deadlines pertaining to the proceeding and has failed to submit a Response.
In keeping with the Policy aim of facilitating a relatively time and cost-efficient procedure for the resolution of domain name disputes, the Panel determines that it would be appropriate for English to be the language of the proceeding.
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.
In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences as it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations set forth in a complaint; however, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) (“Because Complainant did not produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations [. . .] the Panel finds it appropriate to dismiss the Complaint”).
Complainant has shown that it has rights in the PRINCESS mark through its registration with the USPTO, Reg. No. 1,654,535, registered on August 20, 1991 and since renewed. The Panel finds Respondent’s <princesscovid-19.com> domain name to be confusingly similar to Complainant’s PRINCESS mark as it incorporates the mark in its entirety, merely adding the term “covid-19”, which fails to distinguish the domain name from the mark, and the inconsequential “.com” gTLD, which may be ignored.
(i) before any notice to Respondent of the dispute, the use by Respondent of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or
(ii) Respondent (as an individual, business or other organization) has been commonly known by the domain name, even if Respondent has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or
(iii) Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert customers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.
The disputed domain name was registered on May 14, 2020. It resolves to a web page displaying a photograph of a cruise ship, with a superimposed form carrying an introduction in the name of the President of Complainant and seeking to obtain for Respondent sensitive, personal information about Complainant’s employees.
These circumstances, together with Complainant’s assertions, are sufficient to constitute a prima facie showing of absence of rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name on the part of Respondent. The evidentiary burden therefore shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. See Neal & Massey Holdings Limited v. Gregory Ricks, FA 1549327 (Forum Apr. 12, 2014). Respondent has made no attempt to do so.
The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name.
Paragraph 4(b) of the Policy sets out four illustrative circumstances, which, though not exclusive, shall be evidence of the registration and use of the domain name in bad faith for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy, including:
Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name to resolve to a website displaying a message purporting to be from Complainant’s President, seeking personal information from Complainant’s employees, amounts to a phishing exercise. This demonstrates that Respondent must have been aware of Complainant and its PRINCESS mark when registering the disputed domain name, and that Respondent did so for the purpose set out in paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy.
Accordingly, the Panel finds the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <princesscovid-19.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Alan L. Limbury, Panelist
Dated: July 3, 2020
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page