Geeksquadphonenumber.xyz

The timeline behind geeksquadphonenumber.xyz

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 BBY Solutions, Inc. v. John Idle Claim Number: FA2201001979308 PARTIES Complainant is BBY Solutions, Inc. (“Complainant”), represented by Giulio E. Yaquinto of Pirkey Barber PLLC, Texas, USA. Respondent is John Idle (“Respondent”), Texas, USA. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <geeksquadphonenumber.xyz>, (‘the Domain Name’) registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com. PANEL The undersigned certifies that she has acted independently and impartially and to the best of her knowledge has no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Dawn Osborne as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to the Forum electronically on January 6, 2022; the Forum received payment on January 6, 2022. On January 8, 2022, PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the <geeksquadphonenumber.xyz> Domain Name is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com has verified that Respondent is bound by the PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com 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 January 10, 2022, the Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of January 31, 2022 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@geeksquadphonenumber.xyz. Also on January 10, 2022, 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 February 1, 2022 pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, the Forum appointed Dawn Osborne 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’s contentions can be summarized as follows: The Complainant is the owner of the GEEK SQUAD mark registered, inter alia, in the USA for computers related services with first use recorded as 1994. The Domain Name registered in 2021 incorporates the Complainant’s mark in its entirety adding the generic term ‘phone number’ and the generic top level domain “.xyz” neither of which diminish the similarity between the Domain Name and the Complainant’s registered trade mark. The Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name, is not commonly known by it and is not authorized by the Complainant. The Domain Name is being used for a web site offering competing services using a reference to the Complainant’s technicians using another mark of the Complainant BEST BUY suggesting an affiliation with the Complainant where there is none and showing actual knowledge of the Complainant its business, rights and services. This is not a bona fide offering of goods or services and the Respondent is not making a legitimate noncommercial fair use of the Domain Name. Respondent has registered and is using the Domain Name in bad faith, diverting and confusing Internet users for commercial gain. B. Respondent Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. FINDINGS The Complainant is the owner of the GEEK SQUAD mark registered, inter alia, in the USA for computers related services with first use recorded as 1994. The Domain Name registered in 2021 has been used for competing services making reference to the Complainant’s technicians using another of the Complainant’s marks BEST BUY to falsely suggesting a connection with the Complainant. 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 shall 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 it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations set forth in a complaint; however, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) (“Because Complainant did not produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations [. . .] the Panel finds it appropriate to dismiss the Complaint”). Identical and/or Confusingly Similar The Domain Name in this Complaint combines the Complainant’s GEEK SQUAD mark (registered, inter alia, in the USA for computer related services with first use in commerce recorded as 1994), the generic term ‘phone number’ and the gTLD “.xyz”. The addition of the generic term ‘phone number’ does not prevent confusing similarity between the Domain Name and the Complainant’s mark. See Abbott Laboratories v. Miles White, FA 1646590 (Forum Dec. 10, 2015) (holding that the addition of generic terms do not adequately distinguish a disputed domain name from complainant’s mark under Policy 4(a)(i).). The gTLD “.xyz” does not serve to distinguish the Domain Name from the Complainant’s mark. See Red Hat Inc. v. Haecke, FA 726010 (Forum July 24, 2006) (concluding that the redhat.org domain name is identical to the complainant's red hat mark because the mere addition of the gTLD was insufficient to differentiate the disputed domain name from the mark). Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to a mark in which the Complainant has rights for the purposes of the Policy. Rights or Legitimate Interests The Respondent is not authorized to use the Complainant’s mark. The Respondent has not answered this Complaint and is recorded as ‘John Idle’ on the WhoIs database and accordingly does not appear to be commonly known by the Domain Name. See Alaska Air Group, Inc. and its subsidiary, Alaska Airlines v. Song Bin, FA1408001574905 (Forum Sept. 17, 2014) (holding that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain name as demonstrated by the WHOIS information and based on the fact that the complainant had not licensed or authorized the respondent to use its ALASKA AIRLINES mark). The use of the Domain Name is commercial and so cannot be legitimate noncommercial use. It is clear from the evidence that the Respondent has used the site attached to the Domain Name to promote competing computer services which are not connected with the Complainant. The usage of the Complainant’s GEEK SQUAD mark which has a significant reputation in relation to computer support services is not fair as the web site does not make it clear that there is no commercial connection with the Complainant and the Respondent appears to refer to itself, its business and/or its services using reference to the Complainant’s other mark BEST BUY in a misleading way passing itself off as authorized by the Complainant. As such this cannot amount to the bona fide offering of goods and services. See Ripple Labs Inc. v. NGYEN NGOC PHUONG THAO, FA 1741737 (Forum Aug. 21, 2017) (“Respondent uses the [disputed] domain name to divert Internet users to Respondent’s website… confusing them into believing that some sort of affiliation exists between it and Complainant… [which] is neither a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy ¶ 4(c)(i) nor a legitimate noncommercial or fair use under Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii).”). The Respondent has not answered this Complaint and has not provided any legitimate reason why it should be able to use the Complainant’s trademarks in this way. As such the Panelist finds that the Respondent does not have rights or a legitimate interest in the Domain Name and that the Complainant has satisfied the second limb of the Policy. Registration and Use in Bad Faith As determined above the Respondent's use of the Domain Name is commercial and it is using it to make profit from competing services not associated with the Complainant in a confusing manner. The use of the Complainant’s other mark BEST BUY makes it clear that the Respondent was aware of the significance of the GEEK SQUAD name and has actual knowledge of the Complainant’s rights, business and service. Accordingly, the Panel holds that the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain Internet users to his web site by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s trademarks as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation of the Respondent’s web site or services offered on it. This also appears designed to disrupt the business of a competitor. See LoanDepot.com, LLC v. Kaolee (Kay) Vang-Thao, FA 1762308 (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 CAN Financial Corporation v. William Thomson/CAN Insurance, FA1401001541484 (Forum Feb. 28, 2014) (finding that Respondent had engaged in bad faith under Policy 4(b)(iv) by using a confusingly similar domain name to attract internet users where it offered competing services). As such, the Panelist believes that the Complainant has made out its case that the Domain Name was registered and used in bad faith under paragraphs 4(b)(iii) and (iv) and has satisfied the third limb of the Policy. 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 <geeksquadphonenumber.xyz> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant. Dawn Osborne, Panelist Dated: February 1, 2022 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.