State Fair of Texas v. State Fair Guides
[Indexed as: State Fair of Texas v. State Fair Guides]
[Indexed as: STATEFAIROFTEXAS.COM et al.]
National Arbitration Forum
Administrative Panel Decision
Forum File FA95066
Commenced: 28 June 2000
Judgment: 25 July 2000
Presiding Panelist: Hon. James A. Carmody
Domain name - Domain name dispute resolution policy - U.S. Trademarks
- Identical - Legitimate interest - Bad faith registration - Bad faith
use - Passive holding - Respondent was independent contractor for Complainant.
Respondent registered domain names STATEFAIROFTEXAS.COM and TEXASSTATEFAIR.COM
while working as an independent contractor for Complainant. Complainant
was owner of United States and Texas trademarks for State Fair of Texas
and Texas State Fair.
Held, Name Transferred to Complainant.
Respondent registered domain names that were clearly identical to
Complainant's registered marks. The addition of the domain name level designation
<.COM> does not affect the domain name for the purpose of finding it
identical or confusingly similar to a registered trademark.
Respondent was not commonly known by the domain names. Respondent
had made no legitimate or fair use of the domain names whether by providing
goods or services or by developing the website. Respondent was found
to have no rights or legitimate interest in the domain names.
Respondent was clearly aware of Complainant's marks, as Respondent
had signed an agreement regarding the use of those marks. Respondent's
registration of the domain names was in violation of this agreement because
Complainant had not approved this use of its marks. Respondent's
non-use of the domain names was passive holding and evidence of bad faith
use.
Policies referred to
Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy, adopted August 26, 1999
Panel Decisions referred to
Rollerblade, Inc. v. McCrady, D2000-0429 (WIPO June 25, 2000)
Ziegenfelder Co. v. VMH Enterprises, Inc., D2000-0039 (WIPO Mar. 14,
2000)
Telstra Corp. v. Nuclear Marshmallows, D2000-0003 (WIPO Feb. 18, 2000)
PARTIES
The Complainant is State Fair of Texas, Dallas, TX, USA ("Complainant").
The Respondent is State Fair Guides, Dallas, TX, USA ("Respondent").
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME(s)
The domain names at issue are "STATEFAIROFTEXAS.COM" and
"TEXASSTATEFAIR.COM", registered with Network Solutions Inc. ("NSI").
PANELIST(s)
Hon. James A. Carmody, as Panelist.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National Arbitration Forum
("The Forum") electronically on June 26, 2000; The Forum received a hard
copy of the Complaint on June 26, 2000.
On June 28, 2000, NSI confirmed by e-mail to The Forum that the domain
names
"STATEFAIROFTEXAS.COM" and "TEXASSTATEFAIR.COM" are registered with
NSI and that the Respondent is the current registrant of the name.
NSI has verified that Respondent is bound by the Network Solutions Service
Agreement Version 4.0 and has thereby agreed to resolve domain-name disputes
brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN's UDRP.
On June 28, 2000, a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative
Proceeding (the "Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of July
18, 2000 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, was
transmitted to Respondent via email, post and fax, and to all entities
and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative
and billing contacts by email.
On July 18, 2000, having received no Response from Respondent, using
the same contact details and methods as were used for the Commencement
Notification, The Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent
Default.
On July 21, 2000, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute
decided by a Single Member panel, The Forum appointed the Hon. James A.
Carmody as Panelist.
Having reviewed the communications records in the case file, the Administrative
Panel (the "Panel") finds that The Forum has discharged its responsibility
under Paragraph 2(a) of the Uniform Rules "to employ reasonably available
means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent." Therefore, the
Panel may issue its Decision based on the
documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules,
The Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that
the panel deems
applicable, without the benefit of any Response from the Respondent.
RELIEF SOUGHT
The Complainant requests that the domain names be transferred from the
Respondent to the Complainant.
PARTIES' CONTENTIONS
A. Complainant
The Complainant contends that the Respondent has registered a domain
name
that is identical to its trademark registered for and in use by the Complainant.
Further, the Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or
legitimate interests to the domain name, and that the respondent has registered
and is using the domain name in bad faith.
A. Respondent
The Respondent submitted no response in this matter. As a result, all
reasonable
inferences of fact in the allegations of the Complainant will be deemed
true.
FINDINGS
The Complainant owns the U.S. and Texas trademark registrations for
the marks STATE FAIR OF TEXAS and TEXAS STATE FAIR. The Complainant has
been involved with various state fair activities since 1886 when the first
State Fair of Texas opened.
In July 1996, Bronson Havard ("Havard") worked as an independent contractor
for the Complainant to produce 1994-1997 Official Visitor Guides of the
State Fair of Texas. Havard does business as State Fair Guides. The agreement
that the Complainant and Respondent signed in 1994 stated that Havard was
an independent contractor and that he had permission to use the Complainant's
registered marks to produce the Official Visitor Guide. In the agreement,
the Complainant retained the right of approval for the use of the registered
marks, and Havard agreed that use of the registered marks terminated upon
the termination of the agreement.
The Respondent registered the domain names in question on July 26, 1996
and renewed the registrations on June 26, 1998.
The Complainant contacted Havard on December 17, 1999 and offered him
$250 per domain name. The Complainant received no response. The Complainant
made an identical offer on March 9, 2000. The Respondent rejected the offer
but promised to prepare an
accounting of expenses in obtaining the domain names. Havard has not followed
up with this information and has not returned the Complainant's phone calls
or letters.
DISCUSSION
Paragraph 4(a) of the ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Policy ("Policy")
directs that the complainant must prove each of the following three elements
to support a
claim that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:
(1) the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly
similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;
(2) the 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.
Identical and/or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has rights in the registered marks, STATE FAIR OF TEXAS
and TEXAS STATE FAIR. The Respondent's domain names are identical
to the Complainant's
mark, except for the addition of the domain name level designation "com".
See Rollerblade, Inc. v. McCrady, D2000-0429 (WIPO June 25, 2000) (finding
that the top level of the domain name such as "net" or "com" does not affect
the domain name for the purpose of determining whether it is identical
or confusingly similar).
Rights or Legitimate Interests
Complainant asserts that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate
interests in the domain name in question. The Respondent has not denied
that assertion.
The Respondent is not commonly known by the Complainant's marks. Policy
4 (c)(ii). Rather, the Respondent is known by the name State Fair Guides.
The Respondent has made no bona fide offering of goods or services nor
has made a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain names. Policy
4(c)(i), (iii). The
Respondent has not developed the websites located at the domain names at
issue. See Ziegenfelder Co. v. VMH Enterprises, Inc. D2000-0039 (WIPO Mar.
14, 2000) (holding
that failure to provide a product or service or develop the site demonstrates
that the respondent has no established rights or legitimate interests in
the domain name).
The panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests
in the domain names at issue.
Registration and Use in Bad Faith
The Respondent has not responded to the Complaint and, therefore, does
not deny that the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith,
as alleged by Complainant.
Since the Respondent was an independent contractor for the Complainant
and had signed the aforementioned agreement, it is clear that the Respondent
knew of the Complainant's
marks. The Respondent also violated the agreement with the Complainant
by not giving the Complainant approval over the use of the marks in the
domain names at issue. The Respondent registered the domain names to prevent
the Complainant from expressing its marks in the corresponding domain names.
Policy 4(b)(ii).
The Respondent has made no use of the domain names at issue. Passive
holding of a domain name for a period of time is evidence of bad faith.
See Telstra Corp. v. Nuclear Marshmallows, D2000-0003 (WIPO Feb. 18, 2000)
("[I]t is possible, in certain circumstances, for inactivity by the Respondent
to amount to the domain name being used in bad faith").
The panel concludes that the domain names were registered and used in
bad faith.
DECISION
Having established all three elements required by the ICANN Policy Rule
4(a), it is the decision of the panel that the requested relief be granted.
Accordingly, for all of the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that the
domain names, "STATEFAIROFTEXAS.COM" and "TEXASSTATEFAIR.COM" be transferred
from the Respondent to the Complainant.
James A. Carmody, Judge (Ret.),
Panelist
|