Bloomberg, L.P. v. Bloom-berg-dom Jason Beatty and/or Jason Bloom
Bloomberg v. Bloom-berg-dom]
[Indexed as: bloom-berg.com]
Administrative Panel Decision
Commenced: March 21, 2000
Judgment: April 24, 2000
Panelist: Judge Paul A. Dorf, (ret.)
Domain name - Domain name dispute resolution policy - Confusingly similar - Identical - No rights or legitimate interest - Bad faith use - Bad faith registration - Trademark - Service mark.
Complainant, registrant of <Bloomberg.com>, is a U.S. limited partnership that is recognized as a leading financial information source around the world.
Respondent subsequently registered the disputed domain name, <bloom-berg.com>. In Respondent's correspondence with Complainant, stated: "My company is receiving large amounts of your customers e-mails every week via my web site www.bloom-berg.com. <sic> It appears many of your internet customers are place the -(dash) when sourcing your company domain name (Bloomberg.com)."
Based on their correspondences, Complainant believes that Respondent registered the disputed domain name for the primary purpose of selling or otherwise transferring the domain name to the owner of the <Bloomberg.com> for valuable consideration.
Held, Domain name transferred to Complainant
The domain names registered by Respondent are identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which Complainant has rights.
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain names. The name "Bloomberg" is registered in the U.S. and over 80 countries.
domain names have been registered and are being used in bad faith. Panel
Respondent intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, internet users to the web site by creating a likelihood confusion with Complainant's mark, which is recognized and trusted worldwide as the leading source of news, financial and service products. Also,
Policies referred to
Judge Paul A. Dorf, (ret.), Paneliest: -
The above-entitled matter came on for an administrative hearing on April 24, 2000, before Paul A. Dorf, Arbitrator, on the Complaint of Bloomberg, L.P., by Alexander Kim, hereafter "Complainant" against BLOOM-BERG-DOM. There was no representation on behalf of Respondent. Upon the written submitted record, the following DECISION is made:
Domain Names: bloom-berg.com
Domain Name Registrar: Network Solutions, Inc.
Domain Name Registrant: Bloom-Berg-Dom
Date of Domain Name Registration: March 9, 2000
Date Complaint Filed: March 21, 2000
Response Due Date: April 17, 2000
The Complainant filed its complaint with the National Arbitration Forum on the above-referenced date. In compliance with the rules, The Forum transferred the Complaint to the Respondent on March 28, 2000. The Respondent did not submit a response to The Forum within twenty (20) days pursuant to the rules.
That the Respondent
registered the domain name with Network Solutions, Inc., the entity that
is the Registrar of the domain name. By registering its domain name with
said Registrar, Respondent agreed to resolve any dispute regarding its
domain name through ICANN'S Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy.
FINDINGS OF FACT
in which the domain name(s) are identical or confusing are set out herein
Bloomberg, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership with a variety of news, financial, and service products has been in business since 1983, and have been recognized as a leading financial information source around the world. The disputed domain name, <bloom-berg.com> was registered by the Respondent on March 9, 2000. The domain name <Bloomberg.com> was registered by Bloomberg L.P., on September 29, 2993, and has been under continuous use. The name <bloom-berg.com> is obviously identical to the <Bloomberg.com> thus, Jason Bloom at <Bloom_bergcaterinnng@Ireland.com>, claiming to represent bloom-berg.com, wrote an email to Bloomberg, L.P., on March 12, 2000, quote: "My company is receiving large amounts of your customers e-mails every week via my web site www.bloom-berg.com. <sic> It appears many of your internet customers are place the -(dash) when sourcing your company domain name (Bloomberg.com)." From this correspondence, the Respondent has already admitted that the names are confusingly similar and that the confusion already caused Bloomberg's customers to be sent to a wrong web site and caused them to send correspondences to wrong email address.
The Respondent should be considered as having no rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name for the following reasons: First, by using the domain name <bloom-berg.com>, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, internet users to the web site <bloom-berg.com>, by creating a likelihood confusion with the Bloomberg, L.P.'s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the web site <bloom-berg.com>. Second, the name "Bloomberg" is recognized and trusted worldwide as the leading source of news, financial and service products. Third, the name "Bloomberg" is registered in the U.S. and over 80 countries.
The reason the Complainant believes the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith is due to the fact that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name on March 9, 2000, and sent a message about mis-directed emails three days later, claiming to have received "large amounts of your customers e-mails every week," which can not be true since the Respondent had the domain name for only three days from the date of registration before contacting Bloomberg, L.P. From the Respondent's initial and subsequent correspondences, Bloomberg, L.P. can only conclude that the Respondent is trying to force Bloomberg, L.P. to negotiate for the purchase of the domain name from the Respondent. Thus circumstances indicate that <bloom-berg.com> was registered for the primary purpose of selling or otherwise transferring the domain name \to the owner of the <Bloomberg.com> for valuable consideration in excess of Bloom L.P.'s documented out-fo-pocket costs directly related to the domain name <Bloomberg.com>.
The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and has no known conflict of interest to serve as the Arbitrator in this proceeding. Having been duly selected and being impartial, the undersigned makes the following findings and conclusions:
The undersigned has reviewed all the evidence presented in this case by both parties and has concluded to believe the facts and circumstances as set forth by the Complainant. For that reason, the undersigned decides that:
a. The domain names as registered by the Respondent are identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
b. the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain names; and
c. the Respondent
domain names have been registered and are being used in bad faith.
It is therefore just, right and proper that the domain name bloom-berg.com be transferred to the Complainant.
Based upon the above findings and conclusions, and pursuant to Rule 4(i), it is decided as follows:
THE UNDERSIGNED DIRECTS THAT THE DOMAIN NAME BLOOM-BERG.COM REGISTERED BY RESPONDENT, BLOOM-BERG-DOM, BE TRANSFERRED TO COMPLAINANT, BLOOMBERG, L.P.
Dated: April 24, 2000, by Judge Paul A. Dorf, (ret.), Arbitrator
THE HONORABLE PAUL A. DORF, (ret.) Arbitrator
Domain Name Transferred