#200 - patagonia.ca - Complaint DISMISSED

The Complainant failed to establish its case and the panelist therefore dismissed the Complaint. 

The Registrant (Netnic Corporation (on behalf of David Mullen)) responded to the Complaint. The PATAGONIA trade-mark was registered in March, 1987 and the Registrant used its mark in Canada since at least as early as 1976. Patagonia.ca was registered as a Domain Name on February 9, 2005.  The Complainant submits that it offered $250.00 in September, 2009 to acquire the Domain Name.  However, the Registrant responded and requested 11,600 Euros.  Despite the fact that Mullen “parked” his Domain Name, the Complainant could not prove Mullen had no legitimate interest in the Domain Name.  The panel found that the Registrant used the Domain Name (in good faith) in association with its premium water, which was descriptive of the place of origin of the water contained in the product (Aguas de la Patagonia Premium Artesian Still Spring Water). The Panel noted this dispute was fundamentally a trade-mark dispute and presumably ought to be challenged in the Federal Court of Canada.

#199 - bhpbilliton.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED

The Complainant established its case and the panelist therefore transferred the Domain Name bhpbilliton.ca to the Complainant.

The registrant (Abdelmoula Mouhsin) did not respond to the Complaint. The Complainant boasts on its website that it is the world’s largest diversified natural resources company. It registered its BHP BILLITON trade-mark in Canada in April, 2011. The Domain Name was registered on March 19, 2012.  Immediately thereafter, the Complainant received an offer to purchase the Domain Name from the Registrant.  Counsel for the Complainant responded and requested the immediate transfer of the Domain Name, but there was no response.  The website was being parked by Go Daddy, the Registrar. As part of its bad faith analysis, the Panelist found the Registrant could have easily learned (or was wilfully blind) about the popularity of the well-known company, BHP Billiton Group (and presumably its trade-mark rights), by searching the Internet.  

#198 - ophea.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED

The Complainant established its case and the panelist therefore directed the transfer of ophea.ca to the Complainant.

The Complainant is a well-known not for profit entity with substantial goodwill in the area of supporting healthy active children in schools and communities province-wide. Its predecessor in title used the OPHEA trade-mark in Canada since 1975 and its design mark was registered in October 2011.  The Domain Name was registered in February, 2009.  The registrant’s website used to direct visitors to jump-aerobics.com but is now “under construction”.   In April, 2012, the registrant offered to sell its Domain Name to the Complainant for $18,500.00, but later retracted this offer.  The panel held that the Complainant provided proof of its common law rights in and to the OPHEA trade-mark.  As part of the bad faith analysis, the panel found that the hyperlink to the registrant’s jump-aerobics.com web site was piggybacking on the Complainant’s goodwill.

Read the decision here.

#197 - angelsoft.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED

The Complainant established its case and the panelist therefore directed the transfer of angelsoft.ca to the Complainant.

The Complainant advertises and sells paper tissues, bathroom tissues, etc., with sales exceeding $200,000.00 in Canada. After the trade-mark was registered by the Complainant in Canada, the Registrant registered and began operating its domain name as a parked web site offering the Complainant’s competitor products, amongst other things.  A portion of the web site was dedicated to text advising the public the domain name was for sale.  As part of the bad faith analysis, the panel found the registrant was attempting to disrupt the business of the complainant by attempting to have the Complainant make an unsolicited offer for purchase of its domain name.  

Reach the decision here.