The Complainant is a corporation using the PARSONS trademark in Canada and relies on its Canadian trademark applications (filed by Parsons Corporation in the US).
The Panel found that the Complainant failed to satisfy the Canadian presence requirements, since it is a Canadian licensee of the trademark owner. Since it is relying on common law trademark rights, the complaint would have failed in the absence of a registered trademark in any event (even if filed by the US corporation).
You can read the decision here.
Dedicated to your Domain Name needs.
Wednesday, November 27, 2019
#404 - tdeasyweblogin.ca and tdonlinelogineasyweb.ca - DOMAINS TRANSFERRED
The Complainant is the second largest bank in Canada, and owner of the highly popular TD trademark, and it uses the registered trademark EASYWEB in association with its online banking.
The Complainant delivered cease and desist letters to the Registrant, who did not respond (other than registering the second infringing Domain Name that is the subject matter of this Complaint).
The Panel found that the Registrant engaged in a patter of cybersquatting, and the Domain Names redirect users to websites featuring links to third party websites, some of which reference competitors.
You can read the decision here.
The Complainant delivered cease and desist letters to the Registrant, who did not respond (other than registering the second infringing Domain Name that is the subject matter of this Complaint).
The Panel found that the Registrant engaged in a patter of cybersquatting, and the Domain Names redirect users to websites featuring links to third party websites, some of which reference competitors.
You can read the decision here.
Wednesday, November 13, 2019
#402 - slatervecchio.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED
The Complainant is a personal injury law firm operating in Vancouver, British Columbia. It asserted common law trademark rights in its name, Slater Vecchio. The Complainant initially alleged that the Registrant was a former client of the firm, and involved in a defamation suit between the parties (Heinz Kreutz). The Registrant was later identified as K Mullen.
The Panel dismissed the Complaint because of a lack of evidence evidencing rights in the Mark 'Slater Vecchio'. Interestingly, the Panelist referenced the criteria contained in the WIPO Overview relating to UDRP proceedings and cited a failure to provide duration and nature of use of the mark, sales documentation, advertising and degree of public recognition. The Panel did not accept the website printouts and conclusory statements confirming use of the mark for over twenty years.
You can read the decision here.
The Panel dismissed the Complaint because of a lack of evidence evidencing rights in the Mark 'Slater Vecchio'. Interestingly, the Panelist referenced the criteria contained in the WIPO Overview relating to UDRP proceedings and cited a failure to provide duration and nature of use of the mark, sales documentation, advertising and degree of public recognition. The Panel did not accept the website printouts and conclusory statements confirming use of the mark for over twenty years.
You can read the decision here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)