Whywaldorfworks.org

The timeline behind whywaldorfworks.org

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 Association of Waldorf Schools of North America, Inc. v. Lutz Bornschein / iGaming.com Ltd Claim Number: FA2609002244641 PARTIES Complainant is Association of Waldorf Schools of North America, Inc. ("Complainant"), represented by Alexis Crawford Douglas of K&L Gates LLP, Illinois, USA. Respondent is Lutz Bornschein / iGaming.com Ltd ("Respondent"), Bulgaria. REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME The domain name at issue is <whywaldorfworks.org>, registered with Sav.com, LLC - 49. 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. Alan L. Limbury, as Panelist. PROCEDURAL HISTORY Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on September 10, 2026. Forum received payment on September 10, 2026. On September 11, 2026, Sav.com, LLC - 49 confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <whywaldorfworks.org> domain name is registered with Sav.com, LLC - 49 and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Sav.com, LLC - 49 has verified that Respondent is bound by the Sav.com, LLC - 49 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 September 17, 2026, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of October 7, 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@whywaldorfworks.org. Also on September 17, 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 October 8, 2026, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed Alan L. Limbury 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 Since at least as early as January 1928 Complainant has used the trademark WALDORF in connection with educational services in U.S. commerce. The <whywaldorfworks.org> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's mark. Respondent has no legitimate rights in the domain name <whywaldorfworks.org> because the registration of the domain was not authorized by Complainant; the WHOIS record for the domain name does not include any information upon which to infer Respondent is commonly known by the domain name or WALDORF; and upon information and belief, the website is not being used for a bona fide offer of goods or services or for legitimate fair use. Respondent uses the WALDORF trademark to lure consumers to the website at <whywaldorfworks.org>, then advertises an unrelated online casino website. Complainant certainly does not promote usage of online casinos and would never seek out any association with such gambling establishments. Complainant has received no response to a cease-and-desist letter dated July 21, 2026. Respondent registered and is using the <whywaldorfworks.org> domain name in bad faith as it was registered with knowledge of Complainant's rights. Indeed, the domain name was registered primarily for the purpose of disrupting Complainant's business and intentionally attempting to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to the website by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the website. Respondent's website at the domain <whywaldorfworks.org> redirects consumers to the website at the domain <nationalpost.com> when users click an embedded link. The website at the domain <nationalpost.com> includes advertisements for online casinos in Canada. Respondent's registration of the domain name following its lapse from Complainant's control evidences bad faith. Respondent elected to acquire a domain name that had been previously registered by Complainant, demonstrating awareness of the domain's preexisting association. B. Respondent Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding. FINDINGS Complainant has established all the elements entitling it to relief. 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 Complainant has shown that it has rights in the mark WALDORF, namely USPTO Registration No. 2,997,399, registered on September 20, 2005, for educational services; namely, providing courses of instruction following the techings [sic] of Rudolf Steiner, at the primary, secondary and post-secondary level, in International Class 41. It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. The standing (or threshold) test for confusing similarity involves a reasoned but relatively straightforward comparison between the complainant's trademark and the disputed domain name. WIPO Overview 3.1, ¶ 1.7. The Panel finds Respondent's <whywaldorfworks.org> domain name to be confusingly similar to Complainant's WALDORF mark, only differing by the addition of the dictionary words why" and "works", which differences are insufficient to distinguish the domain name from Complainant's mark. The inconsequential ".org" generic top-level domain ("gTLD") may be ignored under this element. See Rollerblade, Inc. v. Chris McCrady, D2000-0429 (WIPO June 25, 2000). Complainant has established this element. Rights or Legitimate Interests Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides that any of the following circumstances, in particular but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be proved based on its evaluation of all evidence presented, shall demonstrate Respondent's rights or legitimate interests to a domain name for purposes of Paragraph 4(a)(ii): (i) before any notice to Respondent of the dispute, the use by Respondent of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or (ii) Respondent (as an individual, business or other organization) has been commonly known by the domain name, even if Respondent has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or (iii) Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert customers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue. The <whywaldorfworks.org> domain name was previously registered by Complainant, promoting its educational services. It is not clear on the record when Complainant ceased to be the registrant. It was registered by Respondent on June 24, 2023, several years after the registration of Complainant's WALDORF mark. It resolves to a website headed: "Why Waldorf Works… A Research-Grounded Analysis of Waldorf Education's Evidence Base". The website contains a hyperlink to an article advertised by <bestontariocasinosites.ca> on the "www.nationalpost.com" website promoting fast payout online casinos in Canada. These circumstances, together with Complainant's assertions, are sufficient to constitute a prima facie showing of absence of rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name on the part of Respondent. The evidentiary burden therefore shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the <whywaldorfworks.org> domain name. See JUUL Labs, Inc. v. Dryx Emerson / KMF Events LTD, FA 1849706 (Forum July 17, 2019). Respondent has made no attempt to do so. The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name. Complainant has established this element. Registration and Use in Bad Faith Paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy is expressed in the conjunctive: "the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith" and Paragraph 4(b) sets out four illustrative circumstances, which, though not exclusive, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii), including: (iv) by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location. The circumstances set out above in relation to the second element satisfy the Panel that Respondent was fully aware of Complainant and its WALDORF mark when Respondent registered the <whywaldorfworks.org> domain name and that Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to Respondent's website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent's website. This demonstrates registration and use in bad faith to attract users for commercial gain under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv). Complainant has established this element. DECISION Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED. Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <whywaldorfworks.org> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant. Alan L. Limbury, Panelist Dated: October 9, 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.