Domeinnaamoverdacht bevolen bij gebruik van twee ING-merken

WIPO 26 augustus 2013, D2013-1272 (ING België, inghomebank.com)
Uitspraak ingezonden door Frederic Debusseré, time.lex.
ING Group heeft verschillende Benelux ING-merken en is houdster van HOME'BANK. Aan de vereisten van verwarringwekkende gelijkenis wordt voldaan. Uit het feit dat de respondent niet reageert, kan er van uit worden gegaan dat er geen recht of legitiem belang is. Als respondent wel een recht of legitiem belang had, dan had deze wel gereageerd op de klacht. De overdracht van [inghomebank.com] wordt bevolen.

D. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
As Complainant has stated and with which the Panel agrees, Respondent is deceptively diverting the public to the Disputed Domain Name by improperly capitalizing on the fame of ING and by confusing Internet users who are made aware on the website that the Disputed Domain Name is for sale. Thus, there is also the factor that Respondent is seeking commercial gain by offering the well recognized two trademarked names included in its Disputed Domain Name. See Bogart, Inc. v. Humphrey Bogart Club, NAF Case No. 162770 (August 4, 2003). See also Nordstrom Inc. and NIHC, Inc. v. Private Registration c/o WhoisGuardService.com, NAF Case No.1412491.

The Panel also notes that Complainant points out that the Real Respondent has taken similar actions seeking to sell the Disputed Domain Name in previous cases.

Of course Real Respondent’s obvious intent to conceal his true identity, by using the name “Personal use” is further evidence of bad faith. This Panel wishes to register its displeasure with the ability of registrars to grant domain names to obviously false applicants. As the Panel has said in the past, it is time to require more of the registrars of domain names to avoid this result so that we do not have to spend the time and money to return the domain name to its appropriate owner.

This third element has been satisfied.