#310 - creativeartistsagency.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED

The Complainant, OHM, Inc., uses the trademark CREATIVE ARTISTS AGENCY in association with its highly popular sports agency services. The Registrant registered Domain Name on July 31, 2015, and is using the website to impersonate the Complainant and advertise that it represents over 200 artists in all fields.  Furthermore, the Registrant uses an email address associated with the Domain Name to perpetrate its fraud.  In its bad faith analysis, the panelist held that the continued use of the Domain Name by the Registrant would preclude the Complainant from choosing how it is represented online, an important business consideration for the Complainant (business run on reputation).  

You can read the decision here. 

#309 - mobilemini.ca - TRANSFER DENIED

The Complainant, Mobile Mini Inc., owns the MOBILE MINI design trademark registered for use in association with metal containers and rental of metal containers for the storage and transportation of goods (used in Canada at least as early as 1990).  The Registrant operates a pay-per-click website with links relate to cell phones and related products/services and digital images of the back of person looking into a self-storage locker and another image that appears to show wooden storage crates in a warehouse.   The Registrant is connected with Ontrack Container Sales Ltd., and despite requesting an extension, did not file a response.  The Panelist disagreed that the Domain Name was registered in bad faith because the Complainant’s were not competitors (no evidence relating to this point in 2006 at the time the Domain Name was registered), the web site makes no reference to the Complainant (cell phones can be fairly characterized as MOBILE and MINI), and there is likely no confusion despite ten years of parallel use.  

You can read the decision here. 

#308 - magnacanada.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED

The Complainant, Magna International Inc. is a global automotive component supplier providing automotive content including seating systems, for virtually every automotive manufacturer of every major brand in the world. Complainant’s sales in 2014 were in excess of 36 billion dollars. The Complainant owns numerous trademarks, including MAGNA, registered in Canada more than 30 years before the Registrant registered its Domain Name, magnacanada.ca.

Despite the Complainant’s attempt to reach out to the Registrant through the CIRA message delivery form, its request to cease the unauthorized use of the Domain Name was ignored by the Registrant. The Panel found that the Domain Name was registered in bad faith because the Domain Name was being used to deceive prospective employees interested in employment at Magna by providing misinformation, and inaccurate statements of Magna’s Employee Charter.

You can read the decision here.

#307 - kiijij.ca, kijigi.ca, kijiijii.ca, kijjijji.ca, kilili.ca, kingstonkijiji.ca, kjiji.ca and wwwkijiji.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED

The Complainant owns Canadian trademark registrations for the trademark KIJIJI, registered February 12, 2008. The trademark registration was before five of the disputed domains were registered, but subsequent to three. The Panel found that since the Complainant had used the mark in Canada since 2005 and registered the kijiji.ca domain name on January 18, 2005, the Complainant had rights in the Mark prior to the registration of the disputed domains.

 

The Panel refused to find that bad faith was established pursuant to 3.5(b) of the Policy (preventing the Complainant from registering the domain names), because the domain names were variations of the trademarks, not the KIJIJI trademark itself, and the Panel is therefore required to consider the intention of the Registrant.

 

The Panel did find that bad faith was established pursuant to 3.5(d) of the Policy (intentionally attracting internet users for financial gain).

You can read the decision here.

#306 - montrealcareylimo.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED

The Complainant operates an international chauffeured limousine service business in association with the CAREY trademark. The Complainant has operated its limousine service business in association with the CAREY trademark in Canada since 1982.

 

The Panel noted that while the Complainant failed to provide evidence of trademark searches to indicate that the Registrant does not have a legitimate interest in the term “CAREY,” it found that the distinct nature of the CAREY trademark, and the Registrant’s use of the Domain Name for a deceptive web site (reproducing portions of the Complainant’s web site) were sufficient to satisfy the Complainants’ evidentiary burden to provide some evidence that the Registrant had no legitimate interest.  With respect to bad faith, the Panel noted that there is rarely “direct evidence” of bad faith and in most cases it is based on common sense inferences of the registrant’s conduct and other surrounding circumstances.  In this case, the trademark was registered for several years prior to the domain name registration, the domain name contains additional descriptive terms implying the registrant knew of the Complainant’s business, and the Registrant’s web site copied substantial parts of the Complainant’s web site.

You can read the decision here.

#305 - hairfinity.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED

The Domain name at issue is hairfinity.ca. The Complainant owns the HAIRFINITY trademark registered for use in association with vitamin supplements.


The disputed Domain Name was registered on April 7, 2015, two weeks before the HAIRFINITY trademark was registered with CIPO. However, the Complainant has used the HAIRFINITY trademark in Canada since as early as January, 2008.  The Complainant has a large online presence, including through its hairfinity.com domain name, Instagram and Facebook.


The panel found that the Domain Name was registered in bad faith as evidenced by the pay per-click links to third party websites including Indigo, a popular bookstore that also sells personal care and body care products. Additionally, the Registrant had previously been involved in 3 UDRP cases proceedings, all of which found the Registrant had used third party trademarks in bad faith.


You can read the decision here.

behr.ca - TRANSFER GRANTED

The Complainant, Behr Process Corporation, is an immensely popular paint, stain and varnish manufacturer. The Registrant’s contact information is privacy protected, and did not respond to the Complaint. The Complainant first began using its BEHR trademark in Canada in 1980 and the Domain Name was first registered on January 9, 2008.

The Domain Name, behr.ca, is currently being used as a pay-per-click web site, including links to Behr Paint and Behr Paint Colours, amongst others.  The Panel found that the Domain Name was registered in bad faith because the Registrant is reaping a financial benefit by way of referral fees.

You can read the decision here.