Globaipowercomponents.com

The timeline behind globaipowercomponents.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 BHP, Inc. DBA Global Power Components v. idi yeun Claim Number: FA2502002139542 PARTIES Complainant is BHP, Inc. DBA Global Power Components ("Complainant"), represented by Thomas A. Agnello of Michael Best & Friedrich LLP, Wisconsin, USA. Respondent is idi yeun ("Respondent"), Florida, USA. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <globaipowercomponents.com>, registered with Wild West Domains, 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. Paul M. DeCicco, as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on February 11, 2025; Forum received payment on February 11, 2025. On February 11, 2025, Wild West Domains, LLC confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <globaipowercomponents.com> domain name is registered with Wild West Domains, LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Wild West Domains, LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the Wild West Domains, 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 February 12, 2025, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of March 4, 2025 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@globaipowercomponents.com. Also on February 12, 2025, 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, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default. On March 5, 2025, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Paul M. DeCicco as Panelist. Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that 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, 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 Complainant contends in part as follows: Complainant owns a U.S. federal trademark registration for GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS for "generator accessories, namely, metal storage tanks, metal fluid storage tanks for use with generators, and metal enclosures for containers for power generating equipment": For more than a quarter-century Complainant, BHP, Inc. DBA Global Power Components, has been an industry-leading provider of a broad range of products utilized in the power generation market, including fuel tanks, trailers, generator enclosures, and containers. Complainant also provides related services including precision sheet metal fabrication, finishing, welding, metal cutting, load bank testing, air flow calculations, and machine shop services for its goods. Complainant was founded in 1996 and began selling its generator accessory products under the GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS trademark in 2001. Complainant now operates out of a 300,000 square foot facility. In 2024, Complainant's revenues were in the hundreds of millions of dollars, Complainant employed more than 1,200 people, and Complainant provided its services to customers nationwide throughout the United States of America and Canada, manufacturing in Wisconsin and operating additional sales offices in Tennessee and Texas. Complainant uses the <globalpowercomponents.com> domain name to address its primary website, which provides information about Complainant and its GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS brand goods and services. Complainant has used the GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS mark and its business name extensively throughout the United States and Canada and substantial sales of Complainant's goods and services have been made thereunder. The at-issue domain name does not resolve to an active website, but instead displays a message stating "This site can't be reached." Yet, Respondent has sent phishing emails to Complainant's customers from the domain name email address mdinh@globaipowercomponents.com. Such emails impersonate an accounting employee of Complainant and request that Complainant's customers pay due invoices, as directed by imposter. Respondent's at-issue domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which Complainant has rights. Respondent's at-issue domain name replaces the second "l" in Complainant's GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS trademark with the letter "i" to create the impression – when the "i" appears in uppercase ("I") – of a lowercase "l"; and is a clear example of typosquatting. The generic top-level domain ".com," may be ignored for purposes of comparison as it is a necessary technical requirement for the domain name. Therefore, because the domain name consists solely of a typosquatted misspelling – i.e., a homoglyph – of Complainant's mark plus a generic top-level domain, the domain name is clearly confusingly similar to Complainant's well-known mark. Respondent lacks rights and legitimate interests in respect of the at-issue domain name. Respondent attempts to pass itself off as Complainant by prominently displaying Complainant's trademarks in phishing emails requesting payments from Complainant's customers. The domain name does not point to an active website but rather has only been used for a fraudulent e-mail scheme impersonating one of Complainant's employees and using Complainant's trademark. Respondent's imposter emails, which contain a homoglyph appearing identical Complainant's trademark in the email domain and impersonating one of Complainant's officers, replicate the overall look and feel of Complainant's communications and are neither bona fide offerings of goods or services under Policy ¶ 4(c)(i), nor legitimate non-commercial or fair uses of the domain name under Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). Respondent's typosquatting is also an indication of a lack of rights or legitimate interests in the at-issue domain name. There is no evidence that Respondent is commonly known as or operates a business or other organization under the at-issue domain name, which further supports that Respondent has no right or legitimate interest in the domain name. Complainant did not authorize Respondent to use the GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS mark. Respondent registered and used the at-issue domain name in bad faith. Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant's GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS mark when it registered and used the at-issue domain name as evidenced by Respondent impersonation in email of one of Complainant's actual officers. Additionally, Respondent's typosquatting in itself evinces bad faith use and registration under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii)." B. Respondent Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. FINDINGS Complainant has trademark rights in GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS. Respondent is not affiliated with Complainant and is not authorized to use the GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS mark in any capacity. Respondent registered the at‑issue domain name after Complainant acquired trademark rights in GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS. Respondent uses the confusingly similar at-issue domain name to host email that impersonates an employee of Complainant in furtherance of facilitating fraud. DISCUSSION Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted and 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 at-issue domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which Complainant has rights. Complainant shows that it has registered GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS with the USPTO which is sufficient to demonstrate Complainant's rights in the GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS mark under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i). See BGK Trademark Holdings, LLC & Beyoncé Giselle Knowles-Carter v. Chanphut / Beyonce Shop, FA 1626334 (Forum Aug. 3, 2015) (asserting that Complainant's registration with the USPTO (or any other governmental authority) adequately proves its rights under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i)). Respondent's <globaipowercomponents.com> domain name contains a misspelled version Complainant's GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS trademark where the mark's second "l" is replaced by the lookalike letter "i" and all is followed by the ".com" top-level. Under Policy ¶ 4(a)(i), the differences between Respondent's domain name and Complainant's trademark do nothing to distinguish one from the other. Therefore, the Panel concludes that Respondent's <globaipowercomponents.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS trademark. See Acme Lift Company, L.L.C. v. VistaPrint Technologies Ltd, FA 1607039 (Forum Apr. 11, 2015) (stating, "Where a respondent has created a domain name in an effort to visually deceive Internet users via a simple misspelling (and when such misspellings are visually similar to the mark), a finding of confusing similarity under Policy ¶4(a)(i) is appropriate.") Rights or Legitimate Interests 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. See Hanna-Barbera Prods., Inc. v. Entm't Commentaries, FA 741828 (Forum Aug. 18, 2006). Since Respondent failed to respond, Complainant's prima facie showing acts conclusively. Respondent lacks both rights and legitimate interests in respect of the at-issue domain name. Respondent is not authorized to use Complainant's trademark in any capacity and, as discussed below, there are no Policy ¶ 4(c) circumstances from which the Panel might find that Respondent has rights or legitimate interests in respect of the at-issue domain name. See Emerson Electric Co. v. golden humble / golden globals, FA 1787128 (Forum June 11, 2018) ("lack of evidence in the record to indicate a respondent is authorized to use [the] complainant's mark may support a finding that [the] respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name per Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii)"). The WHOIS information for <globaipowercomponents.com> indicates the domain name's registrant is "idi yeun" and the record before the Panel contains no evidence tending to prove that Respondent is commonly known as <globaipowercomponents.com>. The Panel therefore concludes that Respondent is not commonly known by the <globaipowercomponents.com> domain name for the purposes of Policy ¶ 4(c)(iii). See Braun Corp. v. Loney, FA 699652 (Forum July 7, 2006) (concluding that the respondent was not commonly known by the disputed domain names where the WHOIS information, as well as all other information in the record, gave no indication that the respondent was commonly known by the domain names, and the complainant had not authorized the respondent to register a domain name containing its registered mark). Respondent's <globaipowercomponents.com> domain name was used to host email pretending to come from one of Complainant's employees. Respondent has sent phishing emails to Complainant's customers from an email address hosted at <globaipowercomponents.com>. Such email impersonated Complainant's accounting employee and requested that recipient pay due invoices, as shown in the emails, to an account sponsored by Respondent. Respondent's sham email was designed to deceive customers of Complainant regarding the email's source and ultimately to swindled funds from such customers. Respondent's use of the <globaipowercomponents.com> domain name evidences neither a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy ¶ 4(c)(ii), nor a non-commercial or fair use pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(c)(iv). See Microsoft Corporation v. Terrence Green / Whois Agent / Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc., FA 1661030 (Forum Apr. 4, 2016) (finding the respondent's use of the disputed domain names to send fraudulent emails purportedly from agents of complainant to be 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)). Given the forgoing, Respondent lacks rights and lacks legitimate interests in respect of <globaipowercomponents.com>. Registration and Use in Bad Faith As discussed below without limitation, there is evidence that leads the Panel to find that Respondent acted in bad faith pursuant to the Policy. First as noted above regarding rights and legitimate interests, Respondent used the at-issue domain name in connection with an email based scheme intent on defrauding third parties. To wit, Respondent's <globaipowercomponents.com> hosted email impersonates one of Complainant's accounting staff so that Respondent might trick the email's recipient into misdirecting funds due Complainant to Respondent. Respondent's use of the domain name to afford an impostor an email address in furtherance of fraud shows Respondent's bad faith registration and use of the at-issue domain name under Policy ¶¶ 4(b)(iii) and (iv). See Abbvie, Inc. v. James Bulow, FA 1701075 (Forum Nov. 30, 2016) ("Respondent uses the <abbuie.com> domain name to impersonate Complainant's CEO. Such use is undeniably disruptive to Complainant's business and demonstrates bad faith pursuant to Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii), and/or Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv)"); see also Microsoft Corporation v. Terrence Green / Whois Agent / Whois Privacy Protection Service, Inc., FA 1661030 (Forum Apr. 4, 2016) (finding the Respondent's use of the disputed domain names to send fraudulent emails supported a finding of bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iii)). Next, Respondent engages in typosquatting. Respondent's domain contains an intentional misspelling of Complainant's trademark wherein Respondent replaces the second "l" in Complainant's trademark with a lookalike letter "i". Respondent thus creates a domain name containing a second level having a near identical appearance to Complainant's trademark and a domain name near identical to Complainant's official domain name to promote confusion between Respondent's domain name and Complainant's trademark. Typosquatting, in itself, indicates bad faith registration and use of <globaipowercomponents.com>. See Computerized Sec. Sys., Inc. v. Hu, FA 157321 (Forum June 23, 2003) (finding that the respondent engaged in typosquatting, which is evidence of bad faith registration and use under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii)). Moreover, Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant's rights in the GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS mark when Respondent registered <globaipowercomponents.com> as a domain name. Respondent's actual knowledge is gleaned from GLOBAL POWER COMPONENTS notoriety as well as from Respondent's overt typosquatting as discussed elsewhere herein. Respondent's prior knowledge of Complainant's trademark further shows Respondent's bad faith registration and use of <globaipowercomponents.com>. See Lemon Inc. v. Sumer Singh, FA 2110519 (Forum September 5, 2024) ("registration of a disputed domain name with actual knowledge of another's trademark rights is sufficient to establish bad faith, and can be shown by the notoriety of the mark and the use the Respondent makes of the disputed domain name"); see also, Minicards Vennootschap Onder FIrma Amsterdam v. Moscow Studios, FA 1031703 (Forum Sept. 5, 2007) (holding that respondent registered a domain name in bad faith under Policy ¶ 4(a)(iii) after concluding that respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant's mark when registering the disputed domain name). 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 <globaipowercomponents.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant. Paul M. DeCicco, Panelist Dated: March 5, 2025 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.