Coldwatercreekcoupons.info

The timeline behind coldwatercreekcoupons.info

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.

NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM DECISION CWC Direct LLC v. Denis Belov Claim Number: FA1501001600281 PARTIES Complainant is CWC Direct LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Laura M. Franco of Winston & Strawn LLP, California, USA. Respondent is Denis Belov (“Respondent”), Russia. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <coldwatercreekcoupons.info>, registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (R171-LRMS). PANEL The undersigned certifies that she has acted independently and impartially and that to the best of her knowledge she has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson sits as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum electronically January 16, 2015; the National Arbitration Forum received payment January 19, 2015. On January 16, 2015, GoDaddy.com, LLC (R171-LRMS) confirmed by e-mail to the National Arbitration Forum that the <coldwatercreekcoupons.info> domain name(s) is/are registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (R171-LRMS) and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. GoDaddy.com, LLC (R171-LRMS) verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, LLC (R171-LRMS) registration agreement and thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”). On January 20, 2015, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of February 9, 2015, by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@coldwatercreekcoupons.info. Also on January 20, 2015, the Written Notice of the Complaint notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts. Having received no response from Respondent, the National Arbitration Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default. On February 16, 2015, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the National Arbitration Forum appointed Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson to sit as Panelist. Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the National Arbitration Forum discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, the National Arbitration Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondent. RELIEF SOUGHT Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant. PARTIES' CONTENTIONS A. Complainant’s Allegations in this Proceeding: Complainant uses COLDWATER CREEK to promote its own business of selling consumer goods through a mail-order catalog. Complainant’s trademark has been recognized and registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") (e.g., Reg. No. 1,531,418, registered Mar. 21, 1989). The <coldwatercreekcoupons.info> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark in that it takes the entire mark, adds the word “coupons,” and affixes the “.net” gTLD. Respondent has no right to or legitimate interest in the <coldwatercreekcoupons.info> domain name. Respondent is not commonly known as the name <coldwatercreekcoupons.info>. Further, the <coldwatercreekcoupons.info> domain name is being used to promote links to third-party websites purporting to offer discount coupons for COLDWATER CREEK products. Respondent registered and is using the <coldwatercreekcoupons.info> domain name in bad faith. Respondent seeks to profit from the likelihood Internet users will confuse Complainant as a source or origin of the unauthorized coupons promoted through the domain name’s website. Further, Respondent sought to take advantage of its actual knowledge of the COLDWATER CREEK mark by registering an infringing domain name. Respondent’s Contentions Respondent did not submit a response. The Panel notes that Respondent registered the <coldwatercreekcoupons.info> domain name November 26, 2014, some twenty five or more years after Complainant obtained legal rights in the mark. FINDINGS Complainant established that it has rights and legitimate interests in the mark contained in its entirety within the disputed domain name. Respondent has no such rights or legitimate interests in the mark and domain name. The disputed domain is confusingly similar to Complainant’s protected mark. Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith. DISCUSSION Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable." Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires Complainant to prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred: (1) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and (2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and (3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. Given Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(e), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and will draw such inferences as the Panel iconsiders appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations and inferences set forth in the Complaint as true unless the evidence is clearly contradictory. See Vertical Solutions Mgmt., Inc. v. webnet-marketing, inc., FA 95095 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 31, 2000) (holding that the respondent’s failure to respond allows all reasonable inferences of fact in the allegations of the complaint to be deemed true); see also Talk City, Inc. v. Robertson, D2000-0009 (WIPO Feb. 29, 2000) (“In the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all allegations of the Complaint.”). Identical or Confusingly Similar: Complainant uses COLDWATER CREEK to promote its own business of selling consumer goods through a mail-order catalog. Complainant’s trademark has been recognized and registered with the USPTO (e.g., Reg. No. 1,531,418, registered Mar. 21, 1989). Registration with the USPTO stands as sufficient evidence of Complainant’s Policy ¶ 4(a)(i) rights in the mark. See DatingDirect.com Ltd. v. Turner, FA 349013 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 16, 2004) (finding that the panel recognizes the distinctive nature of the complainant’s DATINGDIRECT.COM mark through registration with the United Kingdom Patent Office). Complainant argues that the <coldwatercreekcoupons.info> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark in that it takes the entire mark, adds the word “coupons,” and affixes the “.net” gTLD. Merely adding “coupons” to the domain along with the gTLD “.info” does not distinguish the domain name; the disputed domain name remains confusingly similar. See Mead Johnson & Company, LLC v. Chau, FA 1497581 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jun. 18, 2013) (concluding that the addition of the generic term “coupons” and a gTLD did not remove the disputed domain name from the realm of confusing similarity). Respondent makes no contentions relative to Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s protected mark; Complainant satisfied the elements of ICANN Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). Rights and Legitimate Interests: Complainant must first make a prima facie case that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), and then the burden of proof shifts to Respondent to show it does have such rights or legitimate interests. See Hanna-Barbera Prods., Inc. v. Entm’t Commentaries, FA 741828 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 18, 2006) (holding that the complainant must first make a prima facie case that the respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain name under UDRP ¶ 4(a)(ii) before the burden shifts to the respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in a domain name); see also AOL LLC v. Gerberg, FA 780200 (Nat. Arb. Forum Sept. 25, 2006) (“Complainant must first make a prima facie showing that Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interest in the subject domain names, which burden is light. If Complainant satisfies its burden, then the burden shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the subject domain names.”). Complainant argues that Respondent is not commonly known by the name <coldwatercreekcoupons.info>. Complainant claims it has never authorized Respondent’s usage of the COLDWATER CREEK mark in Internet domain names. The Panel notes that “Denis Belov” is listed as the registrant of record for this domain name as per WHOIS. Thus, the Panel finds that the record does not show Respondent to be commonly known by this domain name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). See IndyMac Bank F.S.B. v. Eshback, FA 830934 (Nat. Arb. Forum Dec. 7, 2006) (finding that the respondent failed to establish rights and legitimate interests in the <emitmortgage.com> domain name as the respondent was not authorized to register domain names featuring the complainant’s mark and failed to submit evidence that it is commonly known by the domain name). Complainant argues as well that the <coldwatercreekcoupons.info> domain name is being used to promote links to third-party websites purporting to offer discount coupons for COLDWATER CREEK products. The Panel notes that Exhibit F shows the domain name leading to a website showing COLDWATER CREEK goods while also promoting hyperlink advertisements to unauthorized coupons. See Compl., at Attached Ex. 7. Using the domain name to promote alleged discounts without any authority to do so falls outside the protections of Policy ¶¶ 4(c)(i) and (iii). See Mortgage Research Center LLC v. Miranda, FA 993017 (Nat. Arb. Forum July 9, 2007) (“Because [the] respondent in this case is also attempting to pass itself off as [the] complainant, presumably for financial gain, the Panel finds the respondent is not using the <mortgageresearchcenter.org> domain name for a bona fide offering of goods or services pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(i), or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii).”). Respondent makes no contentions relative to Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name; Complainant satisfied the elements of ICANN Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). Registration and Use in Bad Faith: Complainant also contends that Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith. Respondent seeks to profit from the likelihood Internet users will confuse Complainant as a source or origin of the unauthorized coupons promoted through Respondent’s domain name website. The domain name appears to resolve to a website dedicated to the promotion of coupons for COLDWATER CREEK products. See Compl., at Attached Ex. 7. In Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Alina Bagautdinova, FA 1545528 (Nat. Arb. Forum March 24, 2014), in which the panel agreed that use of a disputed domain name to promote coupon promotions without any authority to do so illustrates an intent to profit from the likelihood of confusion. This Panel finds that Respondent’s use of this domain name creates a Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv) likelihood of confusion. Complainant claims that Respondent sought to take advantage of its actual knowledge of the COLDWATER CREEK mark by registering an infringing domain name. While panels have concluded that constructive notice is not sufficient to support a bad faith finding, the Panel finds that, due to the fame of Complainant's mark and Respondent’s use of it, that Respondent had actual knowledge of the mark and Complainant's rights. Thus, the Panel finds that Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). See The Way Int'l, Inc. v. Diamond Peters, D2003-0264 (WIPO May 29, 2003) ("As to constructive knowledge, the Panel takes the view that there is no place for such a concept under the Policy."); see also Yahoo! Inc. v. Butler, FA 744444 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug. 17, 2006) (finding bad faith where the respondent was "well-aware of the complainant's YAHOO! mark at the time of registration"). Respondent makes no contentions relative to Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). The Panel finds that the Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith; Complainant satisfied the elements of ICANN Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). DECISION Having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED. Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <coldwatercreekcoupons.info> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant. . Hon. Carolyn Marks Johnson, Panelist Dated: March 2, 2015 Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page. Click Here to return to our Home Page

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