Wp4begineer.com

The timeline behind wp4begineer.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.

DECISION Boygenius Inventions, LLC v. imroj khan Claim Number: FA1810001811978 PARTIES Complainant is Boygenius Inventions, LLC (“Complainant”), represented by Matthew G. McKinney of Allen, Dyer, Doppelt and Gilchrist, P.A., Florida, USA. Respondent is imroj khan (“Respondent”), India. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <wp4begineer.com>, registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC. PANEL The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Petter Rindforth as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on October 16, 2018; the Forum received payment on October 16, 2018. On October 17, 2018, GoDaddy.com, LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <wp4begineer.com> domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. GoDaddy.com, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the GoDaddy.com, LLC registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN’s Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”). On October 23, 2018, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of November 13, 2018 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@wp4begineer.com. Also on October 23, 2018, 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 Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default. On November 14, 2018, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Petter Rindforth as Panelist. Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that the Forum has 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 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 The Complainant provides an on-line forum for web-site development resources, and has owned and operated the <wpbeginner.com> domain name since 2009. Complainant has rights in the WPBEGINNER trademark through its registration of the trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) (e.g. Reg. No. 4,854,860, registered Nov. 17, 2015). Respondent’s <wp4begineer.com> domain name is nearly identical to Complainant’s trademark as it simply adds the number “4” and misspells the word “beginner” in the trademark as “begineer.” Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <wp4begineer.com> domain name. Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, as the WHOIS information of record identifies Respondent as “Imroj Khan.” Complainant has not authorized, licensed, or otherwise permitted Respondent to use the trademark for any purpose. Respondent also does not use the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate noncommercial or fair use. Rather, Respondent uses the domain name to host a website where it promotes competing services. Respondent registered and uses the <wp4begineer.com> domain name in bad faith. Respondent uses the domain name to operate a website which promotes competing services, thereby disrupting Complainant’s business by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's trademark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent's website for financial gain. B. Respondent Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. FINDINGS The Complainant is the owner of the U.S. trademark registration No. 4,854,860 WPBEGINNER & device, registered November 17, 2015, for services in class 38. The Respondent registered the <wp4begineer.com> domain name on September 13, 2018. 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 that Complainant must 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. In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel will decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences the Panel considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. Identical and/or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has registered the WPBEGINNER trademark with the USPTO (Reg. 4,854,860 WPBEGINNER & device, registered November 17, 2015). No. 4,854,860 WPBEGINNER & device, registered November 17, 2015, for “providing an on-line forum for web-site development resources”, in class 38. The Panel finds that registration with the USPTO is sufficient to establish rights in a trademark. See Vivendi Universal Games v. XBNetVentures Inc., FA 198803 (Forum Nov. 11, 2003) (“Complainant's federal trademark registrations [with the USPTO] establish Complainant's rights in the BLIZZARD mark.”). The Panel further finds that the disputed domain name <wp4begineer.com> is confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark as it simply adds the number “4” and misspells the word “beginner” in the trademark as “begineer.” Misspelling of a complainant’s trademark, either by adding or removing letters/numbers, may not sufficiently mitigate any confusing similarity between a disputed domain name and a trademark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See Am. Online, Inc. v. David, FA 104980 (Forum Apr. 10, 2002) (“The misspelling of a famous mark does not diminish the confusingly similar nature between the marks and the disputed domain names.”); see also Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation v Domain Admin / PrivacyProtect.org / Denis Ferulev, FA 1652313 (Forum Jan. 19, 2016) (“Complainant notes that the domain name contains the recognised acronym for its FAMILY GUY mark, along with the number ‘24’ … the Panel finds that the <fg24.biz> domain name is confusingly similar to the FAMILY GUY mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i).”). The Panel concludes that the disputed domain name <wp4begineer.com> is confusingly similar to the trademark WPBEGINNER in which the Complainant has right (Policy ¶ 4(a)(i)). Rights or Legitimate Interests Once the Complainant makes a prima facie case in support of its allegations in respect of the second element of the Policy, the burden shifts to the Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). See AOL LLC v. Gerberg, FA 780200 (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.”); see also Neal & Massey Holdings Limited v. Gregory Ricks, FA 1549327 (Forum Apr. 12, 2014) (“Under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii), (“Complainant must first make out a prima facie case showing that Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in respect of an at-issue domain name and then the burden, in effect, shifts to Respondent to come forward with evidence of its rights or legitimate interests”). In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel will decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences the Panel considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. Complainant argues that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <wp4begineer.com> domain name. Where a response is lacking, WHOIS information may be used to identify a respondent per Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii). The Panel finds that the WHOIS information of record identifies Respondent as “Imroj Khan”, with no references to the WPBEGINNER trademark. Furthermore, no information of the record indicates that Respondent was authorized to use the Complainant’s WPBEGINNER trademark. Further, Complainant claims that Respondent uses the domain name to host a website where it promotes competing services. Using a confusingly similar domain name that resolves in a webpage that directly competes with a complainant fails to indicate a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under the Policy. See Upwork Global Inc. v. Shoaib Malik, FA 1654759 (Forum Feb. 3, 2016) (finding that Complainant provides freelance talent services, and that Respondent competes with Complainant by promoting freelance talent services through the disputed domain’s resolving webpage, which is neither a bona fide offering of goods or services, nor is it a legitimate noncommercial or fair use). Therefore, the Panel finds that the Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in the disputed domain names under Policy ¶ 4(a)(ii). Registration and Use in Bad Faith Complainant claims that Respondent registered and uses the <wp4begineer.com> domain name in bad faith by operating a website which promotes competing services, thereby disrupting Complainant’s business by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent's website for financial gain. Using a disputed domain name that disrupts a complainant’s business and trades upon the goodwill of a complainant for commercial gain can evince bad faith under Policy ¶¶ 4(b)(iii) & (iv). See LoanDepot.com, LLC v. Kaolee (Kay) Vang-Thao, FA1762308 (Forum Jan. 9, 2018) (Finding that Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name to offer competing loan services disrupts Complainant’s business under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii)); see also Xylem Inc. and Xylem IP Holdings LLC v. YinSi BaoHu YiKaiQi, FA1504001612750 (Forum May 13, 2015) (“The Panel agrees that Respondent’s use of the website to display products similar to Complainant’s, imputes intent to attract Internet users for commercial gain, and finds bad faith per Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv).”). Complainant provides a screenshot of the resolving webpage, which displays the title “wp4begineer” and appears to contain various articles and videos related to the use of the Internet. Panel agrees that Respondent disrupts Complainant’s business and attempted to commercially benefit off Complainant’s trademark in bad faith under Policy ¶¶ 4(b)(iii) & (iv). The Panel further notes that Respondent’s typosquatting of the disputed domain name compared with the Complainant’s trademark rights, is a clear indication of the intention to mislead Internet users and disrupt Complainant’s business by diverting Internet traffic away from Complainant’s site to Respondent’s website. See Adorama, Inc. v. Moniker Privacy Services, FA1503001610020 (Forum May 1, 2015) (“Respondent has also engaged in typosquatting, which is additional evidence of bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii). Respondents who capitalize on common typing errors engage in bad faith registration under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii).”). The Panel concludes that Respondent registered and uses the disputed domain name in bad faith under 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 <wp4begineer.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant. Petter Rindforth, Panelist Dated: November 23, 2018 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.