Luckycasino-online.com

The timeline behind luckycasino-online.com

Registration, the decision and the archived record of what this domain actually displayed — from public RDAP and the Internet Archive.

Result of record. The panel's reasoning and decisive facts behind each element are in the Intelligence dossier below.

ARBITRATION AN D MEDIATION CENTER ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Glitnor Marketing Ltd v. Melona Richards, Yumeteki Case No. D2025-2675 1. The Parties 1.1 The Complainant is Glitnor Marketing Ltd, Gibraltar, United Kingdom, represented by Abion GmbH, Switzerland. 1.2 The Respondent is Melona Richards, Yumeteki, United Kingdom. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar 2.1 The disputed domain name <luckycasino-online.com> (the “Domain Name”) is registered with Hosting Concepts B.V. d/b/a Registrar.eu. (the “Reg istrar”). 3. Procedural History 3.1 The Complaint was f iled with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on July 8, 2025. At that time, publicly available WhoIs details did not f ully disclose the underlying registrant of the Domain Name or the registrant’s contact details. 3.2 On July 8, 2025, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verif ication in connection with the Domain Name. On July 8, 2025, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verif ication response providing underlying registrant and contact inf ormation f or the Domain Name. The Center sent an email to the Complainant on July 9, 2025, providing the registrant and contact inf ormation disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting the Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. The Complainant f iled an amended Complaint on July 14, 2025. 3.3 The Center verif ied that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisf ied the f ormal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules f or Unif orm Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules f or Unif orm Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”). 3.4 In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on July 17, 2025. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was August 6, 2025. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notif ied the Respondent’s def ault on August 8, 2025. page 2 3.5 The Center appointed Matthew S. Harris as the sole panelist in this matter on August 19, 2025. The Panel f inds 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 4.1 The Complainant is a company based in Gibraltar, United Kingdom, which f orms part of the Glitnor group of companies. It was f ounded in 2018 and is engaged in the business of online gaming under various brands. One of these brands is LUCKY CASINO, and it operates an online casino under that brand from the domain name <luckycasino.com>. Since its regulation in Sweden in January 2019 it has been the f astest growing online casino in that country. 4.2 The Complainant is the owner of various registered trade marks that comprise or incorporate the words “Lucky Casino”. These include: (i) European Union trade mark registration no 018111165 with a f iling date of August 22, 2019, and a registration date of December 12, 2019, for LUCKY CASINO as a word mark in classes 9, 41, and 42; and (ii) United Kingdom trade mark registration no 00918111165 (which is a post-Brexit “comparable” trade mark to the Complainant’s European Union registered trade mark). 4.3 The Complainant also relies upon International trade mark registration no 1780926 (based upon its European Union registered trade mark) with a registration date of February 19, 2024, for LUCKY CASINO as a word mark in classes 9, 41, and 42. Ho wever, as far as the Panel can tell this registration only designated New Zealand and the mark has yet to proceed to registration in that jurisdiction. 4.4 The Complainant is also the owner of the domain name <lucky-casino-online.com>, which it acquired in or about late October 2024 as a consequence of the decision in Glitnor Marketing Ltd v. Viktor Temnyi, WIPO Case No . D2024-3483. Since acquisition it has used that domain name to direct customers to its website operating f rom the domain name <luckycasino.com> 4.5 The Complainant also uses on its website a figurative mark (the “Lucky Casino Device”) that takes the following form: 4.6 The purple colour used for the word “Lucky” in that device is also extensively used on that site as the sites’ background colour. 4.7 The Domain Name was registered on March 14, 2025. It was used subsequent to registration f or a website that displayed the f ollowing device: 4.8 That website invited Internet users to either “Login” or “Sign Up” and to claim a “welcome bonus” of “A$4,000 + 400 f ree spins”. It also displayed a list and promoted what it described as “Top Casinos Malta”. It also described itself on that website as “Lucky Casino Sweden” and contains (together with other ref erences to Sweden) the f ollowing statement: page 3 “This service operates in strict accordance with the current legislation of Sweden and is also of f icially represented in several other countries in Europe.” 4.9 As a result of a take down notice from the Complainant directed to the Registrar and the website’s hosting provider, no website currently operates f rom the Domain Name. 4.10 The Respondent was the named respondent in Société Anonyme des Bains de Mer et du Cercle des Etrangers à Monaco v. Melona Richards, yumeteki, WIPO Case No . D2025-1925 in respect of the domain names <casino-de-montecarlo-online.com> and <casino-monaco-online.net>. In that case the panel held that the disputed domain names had been used f or websites whose content was deceptive in that it suggested an association with the complainant that did not exist. The panel therefore ordered the transfer of the disputed domain names to the Complainant. 4.11 Online records at Companies House, United Kingdom reco rd a company with the name Yumeteki Limited, with a registered office which is the same as that used as the contract address for the Domain Name and one of whose directors is Melona Richards. However, the contact email address provided (which uses the domain name <adkey.agency>) has been used in connection with other domain names that incorporate the term “casino”, where the registrant is recorded as being located in Ukraine or France 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant 5.1 The Complainant contends that it has satisfied each of the elements required under the Policy f or a transf er of the disputed domain name. 5.2 Notably, the Complainant contends that its trade mark is clearly recognisable in the Domain Name. It claims that the website operating from the Domain Name is intended to create a misleading impression that this website is related to or authorised by the Complainant in order to redirect users to competing third-p arty websites, and “most likely obtaining a profit while doing so”. Such activity is said to be incompatible with a bona f ide offering of goods and to demonstrate registration and use of the Domain Name in bad f aith. B. Respondent 5.3 The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions. 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar 6.1 It is generally accepted that the f irst element f unctions primarily as a standing requirement. The standing (or threshold) test f or conf using similarity involves a reasoned but relatively straightf orward comparison between the complainant’s trade mark and the domain name. WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition, (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), section 1.7. 6.2 The Complainant has shown that it has rights in registered trade marks f or LUCKY CASINO. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.2.1. 6.3 The only sensible reading of the Domain Name is as the words “lucky casino” combined with the word “online”, and the “.com” generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”). Accordingly, the entirety of the Complainant’s mark is reproduced within the Domain Name and as a consequence that mark is clearly recognisable within the Domain Name. page 4 6.4 It f ollows that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark f or the purposes of the Policy. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.7. Further, the addition of the word “online” does not prevent a f inding of confusing similarity between the Domain Name and this mark for the purposes of the Policy. W IPO Overview 3.0, section 1.8. 6.5 The Panel, theref ore, f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established. B. Rights or Legitimate Interests and Registered and Used in Bad Faith 6.6 It is usual f or panels under the Policy to consider the issues of rights or legitimate interests and registration and use in bad faith in turn. However, in this case it is more convenient to consider those issues together. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.15. 6.7 The words “lucky”, “casino” and “online” are all ordinary English words, which are in whole or in part descriptive of an online casino. Nevertheless, the Panel is satisfied that the Respondent deliberately chose those words not because of their descriptive associations but in order to impersonate (or at least suggest an af f iliation with) the Complainant’s business under the LUCKY CASINO mark. 6.8 That this is so clear f rom the website that operated f rom the Domain Name, which: (i) used a logo that is very similar to the Lucky Casino Device in that it incorporated slanted text with a similar if not identical font, used a similar combination of yellow and purple (and in the case of the yellow adopted similar light to dark shading from left to right) and presented the words in a slanted box with a backward pointing spur in the lower right hand corner; (ii) adopted a similar predominantly purple colour scheme; and (iii) suggested that it was somehow established and regulated in Sweden, which is a market where the Complainant has been particularly successf ul. 1 6.9 The Panel also accepts that it is likely from the nature of the content on the website and, in particular, its promotion of various other online casinos, that the operator of the website has engaged in such activity for f inancial gain. 6.10 These f indings of the Panel are also consistent with the findings of the panel in Société Anonyme des Bains de Mer et du Cercle des Etrangers à Monaco v. Melona Richards, yumeteki, WIPO Case No . D2025-1925. 6.11 There is no right or legitimate interest in holding and using a domain name to deliberately mislead Internet users into believing that a domain name is held and being used by a trade mark owner when it is not (WIPO Overview 3.0 section 2.13.1) and such holding and use provides positive evidence that no such rights or legitimate interest exists. The registration and use of a domain name f or such a purpose is also registration and use in bad f aith (see WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.1.4). The Panel also accepts the Complainant’s claim that the website which operated from the Domain Name f alls within the circumstances evidencing bad f aith registration and use set out at paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. 6.12 The Complainant may also be right when it states that f alse contact details have been used in connection with this registration. However, given the Panel’s findings as to deceptive use there is no need to consider this issue f urther. 6.13 The Panel, theref ore, finds that the second and third elements of the Policy have been established. 1 The Panel notes that the Complainant has also alleged that “copyrighted images” from the Complainant website have been used in the website operating from the Domain Name. But which are the works alleged to have been copied is not clear. page 5 7. Decision 7.1 For the f oregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Domain Name <luckycasino-online.com> be transf erred to the Complainant. /Matthew S. Harris/ Matthew S. Harris Sole Panelist Date: August 22, 2025

Source of record: WIPO . Reproduced for research; WIPO is the authoritative source.