Friday, May 24, 2013

#227 - swarovskishop.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED



The Complainant established its case and the Panel transferred the Domain Name to the Complainant.

The Complainant is Swarovski Aktiengesellschaft (Swarovski), one of the world’s leading producers of cut crystal, genuine gemstones and created stones. The SWAROVSKI trade-mark has been registered in Canada since as early as 1983. The anonymous Registrant registered the disputed Domain Name on July 12, 2011 and did not respond to the Complaint. The Panel found that the addition of ‘shop’ and ‘.ca’ to a trade-mark does not prevent it from being confusingly similar. With respect to the bad faith analysis, the Registrant’s previous pattern of registering Domain Names comprised of existing marks coupled with the $10,000.00 offer to sell the disputed Domain Name supported the inference that this Domain Name was registered for the purposes of commercial gain and to prevent the rightful trade-mark owner from using/registering its trade-mark as a Domain Name. 

You can read the decision here

Thursday, May 16, 2013

#229 - calgarystampede.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED



The Complainant established its case and the Panel transferred the domain name to the Complainant.

The Complainant is The Calgary Exhibition & Stampede Limited, which operates one of Canada’s largest and most famous events - the Calgary Stampede, an annual rodeo, exhibition and festival. The Complainant has owned the Calgary Stampede trade mark in Canada since as early as 1987. The Registrant is named Gordon Squires and he registered the disputed Domain Name on November 8, 2000. The Domain Name resolved to a web site for a local bar in Calgary, Alberta which had no affiliation with the Complainant, but is viewed by the Complainant as one of its competitors. The panel found that the Registrant registered the Domain Name in bad faith, because not only did it disrupt the business of the complainant but it intentionally diverted and confused internet users by selling goods and services that competed with the Complainant’s own bars and other venues. 

You can read the decision here

#228 - intesa.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED



INTESA.CA – TRANSFER GRANTED
The Complainant established its case and the Panel transferred the domain name to the Complainant.

The Complainant is Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A. and is an Italian bank that ranks among the top banking groups in Europe. The Complainant has been the owner of the registered INTESA trade mark in Canada since 2005. The Registrant is Interex Corporate Registration Services Inc. who registered the disputed Domain Name in 2010 and Nameshield argues on its behalf that the proceeding ought to be stayed because the trade mark was dormant and not being used in Canada (and that there is a pending expungement proceeding). The Panel found that there is no legal proceeding commenced by the Registrant or Complainant to determine the owner of the Domain Name.  The panel is not required to determine if a trade-mark is valid or invalid based on non-use and the Registrant put forth no evidence that it was using the trade-mark or is the rightful owner of the trade-mark in Canada. The Panel also found that the Domain Name was registered in bad faith because the Registrant was presumably collecting pay-per-click revenues from each click of the financial institutions listed on the web site. 

You can read the decision here

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

#226 - myloreal.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED



The Complainants established its case and the Panelist transferred the Domain Name to the Complainant.

The Complainants are L’Oreal SA and L’Oreal Canada Inc.  The Registrant is Victor Silva. The Complainants use the L’Oreal trade-marks in association with its hair care products, and has enjoyed success around the world. The Complainant registered its trade-mark in Canada in 1921 and then in October of 2011, the Registrant registered the Domain Name. The Domain Name was available at auction through GoDaddy starting at a price of $8,500.00.  The Registrant went as far as contacting the Complainant directly by letter on March 19, 2012 with an unsolicited offer to sell the Domain Name. The Panelist found that the Domain Name was confusingly similar despite removing the apostrophe from the trade-mark and including the word “my” in front of the trade-mark.  Amongst other things, the Panelist found that the Domain Name was registered in bad faith because the Registrant was subject to previously brought dispute resolution proceedings and therefore had a continuous pattern of registering well known and famous trade-marks or variations thereof as Domain Dames. 

You can read the decision here