Westmore · UDRP DecisionIbmbios.com
The Panel ordered transfer of <ibmbios.com>. It found the domain confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered IBM mark because it incorporated IBM with the computer term “bios” and the “.com” gTLD. The Respondent lacked rights or legitimate interests because it was neither authorized nor commonly known by the domain and used it commercially for gambling and pornography services. That use of the well-known IBM mark to divert Internet users for commercial gain also supported a finding of registration and use in bad faith.
The timeline behind ibmbios.com
Registration, the decision and the archived record of what this domain actually displayed — from public RDAP and the Internet Archive.
The case illustrates that adding a term closely associated with the trademark owner’s field does not avoid confusing similarity when the trademark remains clearly recognizable. It also demonstrates how use of a well-known mark to direct users to gambling and pornography services can operate across both the rights-or-legitimate-interests and bad-faith analyses.
Result of record. The panel's reasoning and decisive facts behind each element are in the Intelligence dossier below.
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION International Business Machines Corporation v. chenaibin Case No. D2021-0339 1. The Parties The Complainant is International Business Machines Corporation, United States of America (“USA”), represented internally. The Respondent is chenaibin, China. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name <ibmbios.com> (the “Domain Name”) is registered with Alibaba.com Singapore E-Commerce Private Limited (the “Registrar”). 3. Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on February 3, 2021. On February 4, 2021, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the Domain Name. On February 5, 2021, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the Domain Name which differed from the named Respondent and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to the Complainant on February 5, 2021 providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting the Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. The Complainant filed an amendment to the Complaint on February 5, 2021. The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”). In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on February 15, 2021. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was March 7, 2021. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on March 11, 2021. The Center appointed Dawn Osborne as the sole panelist in this matter on March 29, 2021. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7. 4. Factual Background The Complainant is the owner of the IBM trade mark, registered, inter alia , in the USA for computer goods as registration no 1058803 since February 15, 1977. The Domain Name registered on November 23, 2020 has been used for gambling and pornography sites. 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant The Complainant is the owner of the well known trade mark IBM, registered, inter alia , in the USA for computer goods since 1977. The Domain Name registered in 2020 is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark adding only the computer term “bios” meaning “basic input output system” and a generic Top-Level Domain “gTLD” “.com” which do not prevent said confusing similarity. The Respondent does not have rights or a legitimate interest in the Domain Name, is not commonly known by it and is not authorised by the Complainant. The Respondent has used the Domain Name for gambling and pornography sites which is not a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. It is bad faith registration and use diverting Internet consumers for commercial gain. B. Respondent The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions. 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Domain Name consists of the Complainant’s well known IBM trade mark (which is registered, inter alia , in the USA for computer goods since 1977), the computer term “bios” and the gTLD “.com”. Previous UDRP panels have found confusing similarity when a respondent merely adds a term and a gTLD to a Complainant’s mark. The Panel agrees that the addition of the computer term “bios” and the gTLD “.com” to the Complainant’s mark does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity between the Domain Name and the Complainant’s trade mark pursuant to the Policy. Accordingly, the Panel holds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s IBM registered mark. As such the Panel holds that Paragraph 4 (a) (i) of the Policy has been satisfied. B. Rights or Legitimate Interests The Complainant has not authorised the use of its mark. There is no evidence or reason to suggest the Respondent is commonly known by the Domain Name. The use made by the Respondent of the Domain Name is commercial and so cannot be legitimate noncommercial fair use. The web site attached to the Domain Name offers gaming and pornography services using the Complainant’s word mark. Use of a Domain Name containing a well known third party trade mark for such services is not a bona fide offering of goods or services. As such the Panel finds that the Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name and that the Complainant has satisfied the second limb of the Policy. C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith The Respondent has not answered this Complaint or given any reason why it should be allowed to use the Complainant’s well known trade mark in the Domain Name to offer gambling and pornography services. Previous UDRP panels have held that use of a well known trade mark in a domain name to offer gambling and/or pornography services is both registration and use in bad faith. It seems clear the Respondent is diverting Internet users for commercial gain. As such, the Panelist believes that the Complainant has made out its case that the Domain Name was registered and used in bad faith. 7. Decision For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Domain Name <ibmbios.com> be transferred to the Complainant. Dawn Osborne Sole Panelist Date: April 7, 2021
Source of record: WIPO . Reproduced for research; WIPO is the authoritative source.
What Westmore sees around ibmbios.com
The decision is only the record. Westmore connects it to the cases, authorities, panelists, parties and domain evidence surrounding it.
A short, grounded explanation drawn only from this decision's record — not legal advice or a prediction.
Grounded in the Westmore record for this decision. Research/informational only — not legal advice or a prediction of any outcome.
The decision is only the beginning.
You've seen what happened. Now discover the deeper intelligence behind the case, the panelist, the parties and the authorities that matter.
Go beyond the public record: see how this case has been cited, find comparable decisions, analyze the panelist and apply the relevant authorities to your Matter.
Westmore Professional · $395/month
Research with UDRP IntelligenceWestmore AI drafts an attorney-review-ready UDRP response from your facts, grounded in the exact panel and closest precedent.
$895 one-time per matter · no subscription required. Self-help drafting aid — not legal advice.
Build your responseWestmore UDRP records draw on WIPO-indexed decisions and are provided for research and informational purposes only. Not legal advice, a clearance opinion, or a prediction of any outcome.