Anda di halaman 1dari 5

America Online, Inc. v. Johuathan Investments, Inc., and AOLLNEWS.COM Case No. D 2 !" #!

!. %he &arties The Complainant is America Online, Inc., 22000 AOL Way, Dulles, Virginia 201 , !"A an# represente# $y %ames &. Da'is II, Arent (o) *intner +lot,in - *ahn, 10.0 Connecticut A'enue, /W., Washington, DC 2000 , !"A. The &espon#ent is %ohuathan In'estments, Inc., an# AOLL/1W".CO2, 2 Cleghorn "treet, 3eli4e City, 3eli4e.

2. %he Domains Name and 'e(istrars The Domain /ames are 5aollne6s.com7 an# 58uc,netscape.com7. The &egistrars are TuCo6s.com, Inc., an# 3ul,&egister.com, Inc.

). &rocedural *istor+ The Complaint 6as recei'e# $y WI+O $y email on %uly 19, 2001, an# in har#copy 8orm on %uly 1:, 2001. WI+O issue# a &e;uest 8or Amen#ment to Complaint on %uly 29, 2001. The Amen#e# Complaint 6as recei'e# $y email on %uly 00, 2001, an# in har# copy 8orm on August 0, 2001. WI+O has 'eri8ie# that the Complaint satis8ies the 8ormal re;uirements o8 the +olicy, the &ules an# the "upplemental &ules an# that payment 6as properly ma#e. The A#ministrati'e +anel <=the +anel=> is satis8ie# that this is the case. The Complaint 6as properly noti8ie# in accor#ance 6ith the &ules, paragraph 2<a>. 3ul,&egister.com, Inc., has con8irme# that 5aollne6s.com7 <=the (irst Domain /ame=> 6as registere# through 3ul,&egister.com, Inc. an# that AOLL/1W".CO2 is the current registrant. Tuco6s.com, Inc., has con8irme# that 58uc,netscape.com7 <=the "econ# Domain /ame=> 6as registere# through Tuco6s.com, Inc., an# that %ohuathan In'estments, Inc. is the current registrant. The &egistrars ha'e 8urther con8irme# that the +olicy is applica$le to the Domain /ames. (or the reasons set out $elo6 the +anel treats aollne6s.com as $eing a tra#ing name or ?alter ego@ o8 %ohuathan In'estments, Inc.,an# hereina8ter re8ers to them $oth as =the &espon#ent=. On August , 2001, WI+O noti8ie# the &espon#ent o8 the Complaint in the usual manner an# in8orme# the &espon#ent inter alia that the last #ay 8or sen#ing its &esponse to the Complainant an# to WI+O 6as August 2 , 2001. /o &esponse 6as recei'e#. The +anel 6as properly constitute#. The un#ersigne# +anellist su$mitte# "tatements o8 Acceptance an# Declarations o8 Impartiality an# In#epen#ence. /o 8urther su$missions 6ere recei'e# $y WI+O or the +anel, as a conse;uence o8 6hich the #ate sche#ule# 8or the issuance o8 the +anel@s Decision is "eptem$er 19, 2001.

,. -actual .ac/(round The Complainant is America Online acting on its o6n $ehal8 an# on $ehal8 o8 its a88iliate /etscape Communications Corporation. In this #ecision I re8er to them together as AOL. AOL is the proprietor o8 many tra#e mar, registrations o8 or incorporating the mar,s AOL an# /etscape. AOL has $een using the mar, AOL since at least as early as 1:A: an# the mar, /1T"CA+1 since at least as early as 1:AB. 3oth mar,s are 'ery 6ell ,no6n mar,s in the area o8 computer online ser'ices an# other internet relate# ser'ices. 2oreo'er, they 6ere 'ery 6ell ,no6n at the time the Domain names 6ere registere#. (urther, AOL is the registere# proprietor o8 tra#e mar, registrations 8or the mar, AOL.CO2, a mar, it has use# since at least 1::2, an# operates a 6e$site at <inter alia> 666.aolne6s.com. The (irst Domain /ame 6as registere# on %une 10, 2000, in the name o8 aollne6s.com. The "econ# Domain /ame 6as registere# on April 20, 2000, in the name o8 %ohuathan In'estment Inc. The registrants ha'e #i88erent names, $ut they ha'e the same a##ress in 3eli4e an# $oth ha'e the same contact a##resses an# telephone num$ers. The Domain /ames are connecte# <#irectly or in#irectly> to commercial sites. The (irst Domain /ame is connecte# to a 6e$site at 5point.com7. The "econ# Domain /ame is connecte# to a pornographic 6e$site. /either o8 these sites contains any re8erence 6ithin it to either aollne6s or 8uc,netscape.

0. &arties1 Contentions A. Com2lainant The Complainant conten#s that aollne6s.com, the registrant o8 the (irst Domain /ame, an# %ohuathan In'estments, Inc., the registrant o8 the "econ# Domain /ame, are one an# the same an# that it is appropriate this complaint shoul# $e entertaine# as a single complaint on the $asis that there is a single respon#ent to the complaint. The Complainant points to the similarities in the 'arious a##resses an# telephone num$ers in the Whois recor#s 8or the Domain /ames. The Complainant conten#s that the Domain /ames are each nearly i#entical an# are each con8usingly similar to a tra#e mar, or ser'ice mar, in 6hich the Complainant has rights. The Complainant re8ers to its rights in the tra#e mar,s AOL, AOL.CO2 an# /1T"CA+1. It also re8ers to the AOL operate# 6e$site at 5aolne6s.com7. The Complainant conten#s that at the time o8 registering the Domain /ames the &espon#ent 6as 6ell a6are o8 the Complainant@s rights in the a8orementione# tra#e mar,s. The Complainant conten#s that consumers 6ill $e li,ely to $elie'e that, $ecause o8 the &espon#ent@s use o8 the Complainant@s 8amous tra#e mar,s, the Complainant is in some 6ay associate# 6ith the 6e$site. The Complainant points to the a##itional 8act that the Whois search 8or the "econ# Domain /ame sho6s that the &espon#ent uses an aol.com email a##ress 6hich 6ill $e li,ely to increase the ris, o8 con8usion. The Complainant also points to the 8act that the site connecte# to the (irst Domain /ame o88ers ser'ices similar to those o88ere# $y AOL.

The Complainant conten#s that the &espon#ent registere# the Domain /ames 6ith a 'ie6 to capitalising on the 8ame o8 the Complainant@s tra#e mar,s. The Complainant asserts that the &espon#ent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect o8 the Domain /ames. It says that it has not grante# a licence to the &espon#ent to use any o8 its mar,s. (urther it claims that in light o8 6hat is set out in this Complaint the &espon#ent cannot claim in goo# 8aith that it has ma#e a nonCcommercial or 8air use o8 the Domain /ames or that it is commonly ,no6n $y the name AOL, Aollne6s, or /etscape. The Complainant conten#s that the Domain /ames 6ere registere# in $a# 8aith an# are $eing use# in $a# 8aith. In support, the Complainant re8ers to the matters set out a$o'e. The Complainant a##s that the Domain /ames are $eing use# to attract commercial attention an# not to #e8ine the content o8 the sites at 5aollne6s.com7 an# 58uc,netscape.com7. The Complainant 8urther re8ers to the 8act that in a pre'ious ICA// procee#ing <(A00120000: 19A Sunglass Huat Corporation v. Johuathan Investments Inc > the &egistrant 6as 8oun# guilty o8 registering the Domain /ame in $a# 8aith an# using it in $a# 8aith. The Complainant cites the case in support o8 a contention that it #emonstrates a pattern on the part o8 the &espon#ent to register #omain names 6ith a 'ie6 to pre'enting tra#e mar, o6ners 8rom re8lecting those mar,s in correspon#ing #omain names. The Complainant asserts that this is in 'iolation o8 paragraph B<$><ii> o8 the +olicy. The Complainant 8urther conten#s that the use o8 8amous mar,s o8 others, particularly 6hen connecte# to a#ult material, 'iolates the +olicy. .. 'es2ondent The &espon#ent has not respon#e#.

3. Discussion and -indin(s Accor#ing to paragraph B<a> o8 the +olicy, the Complainant must pro'e that <i> The Domain /ame is i#entical or con8usingly similar to a tra#e mar, or ser'ice mar, in 6hich the Complainant has rightsD an# <ii> The &espon#ent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect o8 the Domain /ameD an# <iii> The Domain /ame has $een registere# an# is $eing use# in $a# 8aith. (irst, ho6e'er, the +anel has to #eci#e 6hether or not it 6as appropriate 8or this complaint to $e entertaine# in circumstances 6here the name# registrants 8or the Domain /ames ha'e #i88erent names. The Complainant@s assertion that the registrants are in e88ect one an# the same is clear. The assertion is cre#i$le gi'en the #omain names in issue an# that the contact #etails <i.e. a##ress an# telephone num$er> 8or the Domain names are i#entical. The +anel $elie'es it more than li,ely that the registrants are one an# the same, $ut recognises that it is not impossi$le that the a##ress is an accommo#ation a##ress 8or a multiplicity o8 #i88erent entities. The &espon#ent has electe# not to respon#. 3y 'irtue o8 &ule 1B<$> the +anel is entitle# to #ra6 such in8erences as it #eems appropriate 8rom the 8ailure to respon#. In the circumstances the +anel sees no

reason not to accept the Complainant@s uncontra#icte# assertion that the registrants o8 the Domain /ames are one an# the same. The +anel accepts this complaint as a properly constitute# single complaint co'ering $oth Domain /ames. Identical or Con4usin( Similarit+ The (irst Domain /ame 5aollne6s.com7. This Domain /ame comprises =AOLL=, 6hich is 'ery similar to the Complainant@s tra#e mar, AOL, the term =/1W"=, 6hich is generic, an# the generic #ot com su88i). In com$ination the (irst Domain name is 'ery similar in#ee# to the Complainant@s #omain name, 5aolne6s.com7, un#er an# $y re8erence to 6hich the Complainant pro'i#es a ser'ice. The +anel 8in#s that this Domain /ame is con8usingly similar to tra#e mar,s an# ser'ice mar,s in 6hich the Complainant has rights. The "econ# Domain /ame 58uc,netscape.com7. This Domain /ame comprises the 6or# =(!C*=, the Complainant@s tra#e mar, =/1T"CA+1= an# the generic #ot com su88i). This Domain /ame is not i#entical to the Complainant@s tra#e mar,, $ut is it con8usingly similar to itE In the tra#e mar, conte)t the term =con8usingly similar= re8ers to con8usion as to tra#e origin. Is it li,ely there8ore that, $ecause o8 the similarity $et6een the Domain /ame on the one han# an# the ComplainantFs tra#e mar, on the other han#, people 6ill $elie'e that the Domain name is associate# in some 6ay 6ith the ComplainantE The +anel regar#s it as inconcei'a$le that anyone loo,ing at this Domain /ame 6ill $elie'e that it has anything to #o 6ith a company o8 such high repute as the Complainant. It is mani8estly, on its 8ace, a name, 6hich can ha'e nothing 6hate'er to #o 6ith the Complainant. It is a name, 6hich, $y its 'ery nature, #eclares that it is hostile to /etscape. The +anel notes that in support o8 the $a# 8aith claim the Complainant conten#s that the &espon#ent has registere# this Domain /ame in 'iolation o8 paragraph B<$><ii> o8 the +olicy on the $asis that it has $een #one to pre'ent the Complainant registering the name. The +anel simply #oes not un#erstan# 6hy on earth the Complainant 6oul# e'er 6ish to register this Domain /ame. There is no e'i#ence $e8ore the +anel to support the contention. The +anel is a6are that some companies see, to ac;uire such names, $ut only to 8orestall an#Gor impe#e the more o$'ious protest sites, not $ecause they $elie'e people 6ill $elie'e that the #omain name in ;uestion or any site to 6hich it is connecte# $elongs to or is license# or en#orse# $y the tra#e mar, o6ner. The +anel 8in#s that the Complainant has 8aile# to pro'e that this Domain /ame is i#entical or con8usingly similar to a tra#e mar, or ser'ice mar, in 6hich the Complainant has rights. 'i(hts or Le(itimate Interest o4 the 'es2ondent The Complainant asserts that it has not grante# any licence to the &espon#ent to use the Complainant@s tra#e mar,s. The +anel accepts that uncontra#icte# assertion. The +anel o$ser'es that there can $e no reason 6hy the Complainant 6oul# license use o8 its tra#e mar,s in relation to either o8 the #omain names, one o8 6hich inclu#es a misCspelling an# the other o8 6hich is o88ensi'e. The +olicy gi'es a respon#ent an opportunity to #emonstrate to the +anel that it has rights or legitimate interests in respect o8 the #omain names in issue. A nonCe)hausti'e list o8 circumstances, 6hich #emonstrate the e)istence o8 such rights an# legitimate interests, is set out in paragraph B<c> o8 the +olicy. The &espon#ent has ma#e no attempt to #emonstrate any o8 those circumstances or in#ee# any other circumstances sho6ing that it has rights or legitimate interests in respect o8 the Domain /ames.

The +anel can thin, o8 no reason 6hy the &espon#ent coul# $e sai# to ha'e rights or legitimate interests in respect o8 the Domain /ames, sa'e that aollne6s.com is the registere# name o8 the o6ner o8 the (irst Domain /ame. Ho6e'er, the circumstances are such that the &espon#ent clearly selecte# the Domain /ames 6ith the Complainant in min#, e'i#ently 6ell a6are o8 the Complainant@s tra#e mar, interests in relation to them. The +anel is o8 the 'ie6 that the $usiness name, aollne6s.com, 6as selecte# as a con'enient alias 8or the purpose in han# an# is no e'i#ence that the &espon#ent has $een commonly ,no6n $y that name 6ithin the meaning o8 paragraph B<c><ii> o8 the +olicy . The +anel 8in#s that the &espon#ent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect o8 either o8 the Domain /ames. .ad -aith The (irst Domain /ame 5aollne6s.com7. The circumstances are such that the &espon#ent ,ne6 6hen it registere# this Domain name that it 6as con8usingly similar to the Complainant@s tra#e mar,s an# #omain name 5aolne6s.com7 re8erre# to a$o'e. The &espon#ent also ,ne6 that it ha# no rights or legitimate interests in respect o8 this Domain /ame. This Domain /ame is connecte# to a commercial site. In the a$sence o8 any e)planation 8rom the &espon#ent, the +anel is entitle# to in8er that the &espon#ent inten#e#, 8or a commercial purpose, the natural an# pro$a$le conse;uences o8 ha'ing e88ecte# the registration, namely con8usion o8 internet users. In the result, the +anel 8in#s that the (irst Domain /ame 6as registere# in $a# 8aith an# is $eing use# in $a# 8aith 6ithin the meaning o8 paragraph B<$><i'> o8 the +olicy. The "econ# Domain /ame 58uc,netscape.com7. Ii'en the +anel@s 8in#ing in relation to paragraph B<a><i> o8 the +olicy, it is not necessary 8or the +anel to a##ress this issue. (or the recor#, ho6e'er, an# 8or the reasons set out a$o'e, the +anel reJects the Complainant@s contentions that this Domain /ame 6ill $e li,ely to lea# to any rele'ant con8usion o8 internet users or has in any 6ay preclu#e# the Complainant 8rom registering a #omain name o8 its choice. I8 there is any con8usion, it 6ill $e $ecause people e)pecting to 'isit a protest site 6ill 8in# themsel'es at a porn site. In an o$'ious sense, perhaps, the registration o8 this Domain /ame is an a$use o8 the Domain /ame "ystem, $ut not an a$use o8 a ,in# co'ere# $y the +olicy. (or completeness, the +anel a##resses the contention $y the Complainant that the content o8 the site to 6hich the #omain name in ;uestion is connecte# may ha'e a $earing on the $a# 8aith issue 52articularl+ in connection 6ith adult content5. The +anel accepts that the content o8 a site <a#ult or other6ise> might 6ell $e o8 rele'ance to in#icate a respon#ent@s goo# 8aithG$a# 8aith intentions, $ut each o8 the authorities cite# $y the Complainant in relation to a#ult material procee#s upon the $asis that the #omain name in issue is con8usingly similar to the Complainant@s tra#e mar,. In the case o8 the "econ# Domain /ame the +anel has 8oun# that the Complainant has 8aile# to pro'e con8using similarity.

7. Decision In light o8 the 8oregoing 8in#ings the complaint in respect o8 the (irst Domain /ame succee#s an# the +anel #irects that the Domain /ame, 5aollne6s.com7, $e trans8erre# to the Complainant. The complaint in respect o8 the "econ# Domain /ame, 58uc,netscape.com7, is #ismisse#.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai