URS DEFAULT DETERMINATION
Behaviour Interactive Inc. v.
Claim Number: FA2206001999067
DOMAIN NAME
<deadbydaylight.shop>
PARTIES
Complainant: Behaviour Interactive Inc. of Montreal, PQ, Canada | |
Complainant Representative: St.Lawrence Law Firm LLP
Clara Martel of Montreal, PQ, Canada
|
Respondent: Redacted for Privacy / Privacy service provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf of Reykjavik, Capital Region, II, Iceland | |
REGISTRIES and REGISTRARS
Registries: GMO Registry, Inc. | |
Registrars: Namecheap, Inc. |
EXAMINER
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. | |
Dawn Osborne, as Examiner |
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant Submitted: June 3, 2022 | |
Commencement: June 8, 2022 | |
Default Date: June 23, 2022 | |
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"). |
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration. |
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Clear and convincing evidence. |
FINDINGS and DISCUSSION
Findings of Fact: [OptionalComment] |
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.
[URS 1.2.6.1] The registered domain name(s) is/are identical or confusingly similar
to a word mark: Determined: Finding for Complainant The disputed domain name registered in 2022 consists of the Complainant’s DEAD BY DAYLIGHT trade mark (registered, inter alia, in the UK since 2017) and the gTLD .stop. The disputed domain name is, therefore, identical to the Complainant’s mark for the purposes of this procedure. [URS 1.2.6.2] Registrant has no legitimate right or interest to the domain name. Determined: Finding for Complainant The Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name and is not authorised by the Complainant. The use by the Respondent is commercial so is not legitimate non commercial or fair use. The disputed domain name has been used for a site using the Complainant’s mark and logo as a masthead to sell competing goods bearing the Complainant’s trade mark. This is not a bona fide offering of goods or services.
[URS 1.2.6.3] The domain name(s) was/were registered and is being used in bad faith.
Determined: Finding for Complainant The use of hte Complainant’s logo on the Respondent’s web site shows that the Respondent knows about the Complainant and its business and products The Respondent has used the Complainant’s trade mark and logo as a masthead and the Respondent’s site appears official when it is not. By using the domain name Registrant has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain, Internet users to Registrant’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 Registrant’s web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location, ,thereby disrupting the Complainant’s business with competing behaviour, . FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an abuse of this proceeding or that it contained material falsehoods. The Examiner finds as follows:
DETERMINATION
After reviewing the parties 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 name(s) be SUSPENDED for
the duration of the registration:
|
Dawn Osborne Examiner
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page