Las Vegas Sands Corp. v. wendik ace
Claim Number: FA2204001991444
Complainant is Las Vegas Sands Corp. ("Complainant"), represented by Michael J. McCue of Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP, Nevada, USA. Respondent is wendik ace ("Respondent"), China.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <marinabaysands-sg.com>, 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 April 7, 2022; the Forum received payment on April 7, 2022.
On April 8, 2022, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by email to the Forum that the <marinabaysands-sg.com> domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. GoDaddy.com, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, LLC 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 April 11, 2022, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of May 2, 2022 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@marinabaysands-sg.com. Also on April 11, 2022, 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 May 8, 2022, 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 "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 owns and operates resorts in Macao and Singapore, including the Marina Bay Sands in Singapore, which opened in 2010. Complainant uses the MARINA BAY SANDS mark in connection with that resort. Complainant owns trademark registrations for MARINA BAY SANDS in standard character form in the United States, China, and other jurisdictions throughout the world.
Respondent registered the disputed domain name <marinabaysands-sg.com> via a privacy registration service in January 2022. The domain name is being used for a website that promotes what appear to be counterfeit Chanel products for sale. Complainant states that Respondent is not commonly known by the domain name and is not authorized to use Complainant's mark.
Complainant contends on the above grounds that the disputed domain name <marinabaysands-sg.com> is confusingly similar to its MARINA BAY SANDS mark; that Respondent lacks 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 disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a mark in which Complainant has rights; that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and that the disputed domain name was 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."
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 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 Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, § 4.3 (3d ed. 2017), available at http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) (dismissing complaint where complainant failed to "produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations").
The disputed domain name <marinabaysands-sg.com> incorporates Complainant's registered MARINA BAY SANDS trademark, omitting the spaces and adding a hyphen, a geographical abbreviation for Singapore, and the ".com" top-level domain. These alterations do not substantially diminish the similarity between the domain name and Complainant's mark. See, e.g., Las Vegas Sands Corp. v. Agus Siswanto, FA 1973598 (Forum Dec. 13, 2021) (finding <marina-bay-sands.com> confusingly similar to MARINA BAY SANDS); Las Vegas Sands Corp. v. Marina Bay Sands Marina Bay Sands, FA 1066743 (Forum Oct. 5, 2007) (finding <marinabayssands.com> confusingly similar to MARINA BAY SANDS); Morgan Stanley v. Wang Zhong Zhou / Nan Jing Zhi Tu Qi Ye Guan Li You Xian Gong Si, FA 1925465 (Forum Jan. 13, 2021) (finding <morganstanley-sg.com> confusingly similar to MORGAN STANLEY). The Panel considers the disputed domain name to be confusingly similar to a mark in which Complainant has rights.
Under the Policy, the Complainant must first make a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, and then the burden shifts to the Respondent to come forward with concrete evidence of such rights or legitimate interests. See Hanna-Barbera Productions, Inc. v. Entertainment Commentaries, FA 741828 (Forum Aug. 18, 2006).
The disputed domain name incorporates Complainant's registered mark without authorization, and it is being used to attract Internet users seeking Complainant's mark to what appears to be a fake Chanel website that is otherwise unrelated to the domain name and Complainant's mark. Such use is unlikely to give rise to rights or legitimate interests under the Policy. See, e.g., WordPress Foundation v. Above.com Domain Privacy, FA 1641647 (Forum Nov. 5, 2019) (finding lack of rights or interests where domain name was used to redirect to unrelated third-party websites); World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. v. Xie Yue Hong / Li Xiao An, FA 1511882 (Forum Aug. 30, 2013) (finding lack of rights or interests where domain names incorporating mark were used to promote unlicensed or counterfeit goods or an unrelated business).
Complainant has made a prima facie case that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the domain name, and Respondent has failed to come forward with any evidence of such rights or interests. Accordingly, the Panel finds that Complainant has sustained its burden of proving that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.
Finally, Complainant must show that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. Under paragraph 4(b)(iii) of the Policy, bad faith may be shown by evidence that Respondent registered the disputed domain name "primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor." Under paragraph 4(b)(iv), bad faith may be shown by evidence that "by using the domain name, [Respondent] intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to [Respondent's] web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of [Respondent's] web site or location or of a product or service on [Respondent's] web site or location."
Respondent used a privacy registration service to register a domain name that combines Complainant's registered mark with a geographical abbreviation for the location of the resort to which the mark refers, and is using the domain name to attract Internet visitors seeking Complainant to an unrelated website that appears to be promoting unauthorized and counterfeit products. Such conduct is indicative of bad faith registration and use under the Policy. See, e.g., World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. v. Xie Yue Hong / Li Xiao An, supra (finding bad faith where domain names were used to promote unlicensed or counterfeit goods or an unrelated business). The Panel so finds.
Having considered the three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <marinabaysands-sg.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
David E. Sorkin, Panelist
Dated: May 9, 2022
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page