F&C Management Limited of London, United Kingdom of Great Britain just got the domain name thamesrivers.com awarded to them by a UDRP panel based off of a Community Trade Mark registration.
The domain holder did not respond to the complaint
Here is the relevant facts and findings:
The Complainant states that it is an international company which specializes in investment and asset management and has operated since 1868. It acquired Thames River Capital Group Limited and its subsidiary companies on September 10, 2010. It submits evidence that Thames River Capital Group Limited traded under the marks THAMES RIVER and THAMES RIVER CAPITAL and the “boat” device since at least March 2001 and that it registered the domain name
The Complainant submits that the Domain Name incorporates the whole of its trademark THAMES RIVER and is identical or highly similar to both that mark and its mark THAMES RIVER CAPITAL.
Even in a case such as this where the Respondent has failed to file a Response, the Complainant must still establish that all three of the above elements are present.
The Complainant has established that it is the proprietor of a Community Trade Mark registration for the mark THAMES RIVER. Ignoring the space between the words, the Domain Name is identical to the Complainant’s mark but for the addition of a letter “s” and the generic Top-Level-Domain (“gTLD”) “.com”. In the view of the Panel the addition of the letter “s” does not serve to distinguish the Domain Name from the Complainant’s trademark. Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Complainant submits that the Respondent has failed to demonstrate that it has any rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain name, and in the view of the Panel, has made out a prima facie case in that regard.
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy sets out a number of matters upon which the Respondent may rely to demonstrate that it has rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name. While it was open to the Respondent to reply to the Complainant’s case, no Response has been received from the Respondent in this proceeding and there is no other evidence available to the Panel to suggest that the Respondent has any rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name.
Accordingly, the Panel concludes that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name.
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
The Complainant has submitted credible evidence that the Respondent is using the Domain Name for the purposes of a website which impersonates the Complainant’s subsidiary company and which may be implicated in fraudulent financial activities. In particular, the Complainant has produced evidence that the Respondent’s website falsely presents itself as that of the Complainant’s subsidiary, Thames River Capital Group Limited, using not only the name of that company but also its prior business address and the Complainant’s THAMES RIVER mark including its distinctive “boat” device.
The Respondent has not disputed the Complainant’s claims and the Panel finds in the circumstances that the Respondent has used the Domain Name intentionally to attract Internet users to its website for commercial gain by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of its website (paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy).
Accordingly, the Panel concludes that the Domain Name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.