Thebusinessyear.com

The timeline behind thebusinessyear.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.

NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM DECISION The Business Year International, Inc. v. alina lintari Claim Number: FA2605002223977 PARTIES Complainant is The Business Year International, Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by Roberto Ledesma of Lewis & Lin, LLC, New York, USA. Respondent is alina lintari ("Respondent"), Indonesia. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <thebusinessyear.com> ('the Domain Name'), registered with NameCheap, Inc. PANEL The undersigned certifies that they have acted independently and impartially and to the best of their knowledge have no known conflict in serving as Panelist in this proceeding. Dawn Osborne as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on May 28, 2026; Forum received payment on May 28, 2026. On May 29, 2026, NameCheap, Inc. confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <thebusinessyear.com> Domain Name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. NameCheap, Inc. has verified that Respondent is bound by the NameCheap, Inc. 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 June 5, 2026, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of June 25, 2026 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@thebusinessyear.com. Also on June 5, 2026, 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 June 26, 2026 pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Dawn Osborne 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's contentions can be summarised as follows: Complainant owns the trade mark THE BUSINESS YEAR registered, inter alia, as a word mark in the United Kingdom for publications since October 2025 (and in its logo form back to 2016). The Complainant also adduced proof of extensive use of its mark back to 2009 for its business publications demonstrating distinctiveness through use which has, in turn, clearly resulted in its semi-descriptive mark achieving registered trade mark status. The Domain Name is identical to the Complainant's mark for the purposes of the Policy coupled only with the gTLD .com. Complainant previously owned the Domain Name from 2009 until March 2026 when the Domain Name was stolen. The Respondent acquired the Domain Name in March 2026. Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the stolen Domain Name, is not commonly known by the Domain Name and is not authorised by the Complainant. The Respondent has not used the Domain Name so there is no bona fide offering of goods or services or legitimate non-commercial fair use. Respondent registered and is using the Domain Name in bad faith under the Policy to disrupt the Complainant's business. Stealing a domain name is prima facie bad faith under the Policy. B. Respondent Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. FINDINGS Complainant owns the trade mark THE BUSINESS YEAR registered, inter alia, as a word mark in the United Kingdom for publications since October 2025 and has reputation and goodwill in the mark due to extensive use for its business publications back to 2009. Complainant previously owned the Domain Name from 2009 until March 22, 2026 when the Domain Name was stolen. The Respondent acquired the Domain Name on March 22, 2026. 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 3.1 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 registered by the Complainant in 2009 consists of the Complainant's THE BUSINESS YEAR registered trade mark and the gTLD .com. The gTLD .com 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 holds that the Domain Name is identical for the purpose of the Policy to a mark in which the Complainant has rights. Rights or Legitimate Interests The Respondent is not authorised by the Complainant and does not appear to be commonly known by the Domain Name. See Alaska Air Group, Inc. and its subsidiary, Alaska Airlines v. Song Bin, FA 1574905 (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 Complainant produced a series of WhoIS searches and way back archive web site screenshots to prove that it owned the Domain Name back to 2009 until March 22, 2026 when the Domain Name was stolen. The Complainant produced a copy of the crime report recorded as submitted to the FBI with the details as to when and how the Domain Name was hacked and stolen. Proof that a domain name has been stolen is prima facie proof of a lack of rights and legitimate interests. Thompson Island Outward Bound Education Center v. Larrie Noble/ Dirty Mackn Entertainment Corp, Case No. D2013-1144. The Respondent has not answered this Complaint or offered any explanation or evidence to rebut the prima facie case evidenced by the Complainant herein, in particular as to the serious allegation that the Domain Name was stolen. As such the Panel 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 The Complainant has submitted proof that the Domain Name was stolen from the Complainant by the Respondent, an accusation that the Respondent does not deny. Unauthorised transfer of a domain name is bad faith registration and use. See Worldcom Exchange, Inc v. Wei.com, Inc., WIPO Case No. D2004-0955. As such, the Panel holds that the Complainant has made out its case that the Domain Name was registered and used in bad faith 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 <thebusinessyear.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant. Dawn Osborne, Panelist Dated: June 26, 2026 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.