National Arbitration Forum

 

DECISION

 

Reed Elsevier Inc. and Reed Elsevier Properties Inc. v. Ben Dover

Claim Number: FA0501000408246

 

PARTIES

Complainants are Reed Elsevier Inc. and Reed Elsevier Properties Inc. (collectively, “Complainant”), represented by Tara M. Vold, of Fulbright and Jaworski L.L.P., 801 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W., Washington, DC 20004.  Respondent is Ben Dover (“Respondent”), 332 West 24th, New York, NY 10018.

 

REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME 

The domain name at issue is <variety-magazine.com>, registered with Gandi.

 

PANEL

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 Panelist in this proceeding.

 

R. Glen Ayers, Jr. served as a Panelist.

 

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically on January 24, 2005; the National Arbitration Forum received a hard copy of the Complaint on January 25, 2005.

 

On January 25, 2005, Gandi confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the domain name <variety-magazine.com> is registered with Gandi and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name.  Gandi has verified that Respondent is bound by the Gandi registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”).

 

On January 27, 2005, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the “Commencement Notification”), setting a deadline of February 16, 2005 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail, post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts, and to postmaster@variety-magazine.com by e-mail.

 

A timely Response was received and determined to be complete on February 11, 2005.

 

On February 18, 2005, pursuant to Complainant’s request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed R. Glen Ayers, Jr., as Panelist.

 

RELIEF SOUGHT

Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.

 

PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS

A. Complainant

Complainants, Reed Elsevier, Inc. and Reed Elsevier Properties, Inc. (“Complainant”) assert that Complainant is in the business of publishing magazines, newsletters, and other material including the very famous entertainment magazine “VARIETY.”  There are various VARIETY publications and VARIETY domain names, including <variety.com> and <dailyvariety.com>.  Complainant is the owner of a number of trademarks related to VARIETY registered n the United States and elsewhere. 

 

Complainant asserts that Respondent registered the domain name <variety‑magazine.com> on December 12, 2004.  This domain name resolves to a pornography site, <worldsex.com>. 

 

Complainant asserts that the domain name is either identical to or confusing similar to its marks. 

 

Complainant asserts that there is no legitimate rights of the name held by Respondent and Complainant asserts that it certainly has not given any rights to Respondent.  Complainant asserts that there is no bona fide offering of goods or services, since the domain name dissolves to a pornography website. 

 

Further, given the famous nature of mark, registration of a domain name incorporating a famous mark is clear evidence of bad faith. 

 

B. Respondent

The Respondent did file a response consisting entirely of the following statement:

 

“Hello, I didn’t get a copy of the complaint.  Why do they deserve my domain name?  Because they paid you to get it.  This is a formal response [sic], I would like to keep my name.  Thanks, Mr. Dover”

 

Readers should note that the name of the Respondent is a somewhat questionable sobriquet, “BEN DOVER.”  This Response was not served on Complainant, as required, but the Panelist has determined to consider the Response. 

 

C. Additional Submissions

In response to Mr. Ben Dover’s short submission, Complainant noted that it had taken every step possible to communicate with Mr. Dover.  Apparently, Mr. Dover has not given accurate information, which would enable anyone to contact Mr. Dover.  According to Complainant, Mr. Dover’s addresses of record are as fictitious as his name.  His first address, listed with WHOIS, was ‘“666 Hellway, New York, New York 10018, ‘with a telephone and fax of’ (212) 555-1212.”’  Therefore, failure of Mr. Dover to receive information, says Complainant, is his own fault. 

 

FINDINGS

In the absence of any appropriate response from “Mr. Ben Dover,” the only findings possible for the Panelist are that the Complainant has provided adequate information and evidence that its marks in its “VARIETY” trademarks, which are certainly famous marks, are identical to or confusingly similar to the domain name selected by Mr. Dover, <variety-magazine.com>. 

 

Of course, Respondent has not asserted that he or it has any interest in the VARIETY name and has not asserted that the VARIETY name is being used to promote any bona fide offerings of goods and services.  As Complainant has asserted, there is ample evidence that there are no rights in the name and that the name is not being used to promote bona fide offerings of goods and services, since the resolution of the domain name is to a pornography site. 

 

Finally, as to bad faith, the findings are clear as to the bad faith of the Respondent.  If nothing else, the use of the name “Ben Dover,” and the false addresses, including “666 Hellway,” are clear evidence that Mr. Dover registered these names in bad faith. 

 

DISCUSSION

Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (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 the 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 the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;

(2)    the 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.

 

Identical and/or Confusingly Similar

 

The Complainant has clearly demonstrated that the domain name and VARIETY marks are identical to or confusing similar.  The VARIETY marks are registered and are famous.  The mere addition of a “-” and a generic word such as “magazine” are irrelevant.  See generally, Chernow Communications, Inc. v. Kimball, D2000-0119 (WIPO May 18, 2000); see also, Arthur Guinness Son & Co. (Dublin) Ltd. v. Healy/BOSTH, D2001-0026 (WIPO Mar 23, 2001).  But see Rollerblade, Inc. v. CBNO, D2000-0427 (WIPO Aug. 24, 2000).  

 

Rights or Legitimate Interests

 

Complainant’s facts clearly establish that the use of the domain name to redirect Internet users to a pornography website, <worldsex.com>, means that Respondent’s use of the domain name is not in connection with any bona fide offering of goods or services.  Further, there is no legitimate use or fair use.  See generally, Brown & Bigelow, Inc. v. Rodela, FA 96466 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 5, 2001). 

 

Further, since there is no evidence that Respondent might be known by the name <variety-magazine.com> nor is it authorized to use the marks.  There is no legitimate interest in the name.  See Broadcom Corp. v. Intellifone Corp., FA 96356 (Nat. Arb. Forum Feb. 5, 2001). 

 

Registration and Use in Bad Faith

 

Finally, this Panelist, like others, finds that the simple use of a mark to redirect traffic to a pornography website is, ispo facto, bad faith.  See generally, Wells Fargo & Co. v. Party Night, Inc., FA 144647 (Nat. Arb. Forum Mar. 18, 2003). 

 

In addition, however, the Panelist wishes to note that the use of obviously false names (Ben Dover), coupled with obviously false addresses and telephone numbers provided to WHOIS, constitute acts of bad faith. 

 

DECISION

Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.

 

Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <variety-magazine.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.

 

 

 

R. GLEN AYERS, JR.

 

Dated:  March 4, 2005

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

 

Click Here to return to our Home Page

 

National Arbitration Forum