WIPO

 


DZⱸ

 

г

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. iContents

ǹȣ: D2006-0226

Also Available in PDF Format: D2006-0226

 

1.

û: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Bentonville, Arkansas, United States of America.

û 븮: Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Nicholson Graham LLP, United States of America and Cho & Partners, Republic of Korea.

ǽû: iContents, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

ǽû 븮: Dongsuh Law Offices, Republic of Korea.

 

2. ̸ ϱ

̸ <samclub.com>̰, ﵵ̸ HANGANG Systems Inc. d/b/a Doregi.com ϵǾ ִ.

 

3.

û ذû(, ѱ) 2006 2 21Ϻ 3 3Ͽ ڼ Ϲݼ , DZⱸ(WIPO) ( ͡ Ī) Ͽ ʹ 2006 2 23 26 ش Ͽ.

ʹ ذû 2006 2 23 ϱ ûϴ ̸ ߼Ͽ, ϱ 27ڷ Ϳ 亯 ؼ (1) û 纻 , (2) ﵵ̸ ϻ, (3) ǽû ̶ , (4) ﵵ̸  ó , (5) 밡ɼ, (6) ﵵ̸ ϻ׿ ̶ , (7) Ͼ  ѱ (8) ϱ £ Ͽ ϱ ֵ 繫 Ȯ ־.

ʹ 2006 3 14 ذû ϵ̸ ذ (), Ģ(Ģ) ϵ̸ ذ WIPOĢ(Ģ) ǿ ϴ θ Ͽ.

ʹ Ģ 2 (a) 4 (a)׿ 2006 3 14 ذû ذû Բ ڿ ǽûο ߼ϴ ÿ Ư ۼ Ͽ ǽûο ߼Ͽ. ׸ Ģ 5 (a)׿ ǽû 亯 ִ 2006 4 3 Ͽ¹, 3 30 ǽû ھ 亯 Կ 3 31 亯 Ȯ, Ͽ.

û 2006 4 28Ϻ 5 5Ͽ ھİ Ϲݾ ѱ ߰ Ͽ, ʹ ̿ 5 2 ش ɻ Ͽ, 5 19Ͽ ִ.

, û 3 г ǻ翡 , ʹ ذ г г ȣ縦, г , Ͽ гμ ³ 򼺰 Ͽ Ģ 7 2006 5 23 г ϰ Ͽ.

 

4. ǰ

û ̱ ĭ ֿ μ, ̱ ѹα Ʈ ȣ Ҹž ϴ ̱ Ϻ SAMS CLUB̶ ȣ ȸ ϰ ִ. SAMS CLUB ̱ 500 ̻ 4,600 ȸ Ȯ ̱ ִ ȸ ̸, ȣ ̱(ǥϹȣ 2,036,770), ѹα( ǥϹȣ 50083, 61416, 63798, 63799)  ǥ Ǿ ִ. , û Ʈ www.samscub.com Ͽ SAMS CLUB ϰ ȸ鿡 ǰ 񽺿 ¶ ż񽺸 ϰ ִ.

ǽû 2000 9 27 ﵵ̸ Ͽ.

ﵵ̸ Ͽ, û 2005 5 5 5 10 ڼ Ϲݼ ǽû ذû Ϳ Ͽ(Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. iContents, WIPO ǹȣ D2005-0492), 6 28 ػ ܵг ǽû ﵵ ̸ Ͽ Ǹ ƴѴٴ ǽû ﵵ̸ Ͽٴ ̷ ʾҴٴ û ⰢϿ.

 

5. ڵ

A. û

û 2005 6 28 ̹ ̷ Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. iContents (WIPO ǹȣ D2005-0492)( ǡ̶ ) ûǿ Ͽ ɸ ̷ Ѵٰ ϸ鼭, ٰŷμ Ͽ.

û Ǿٴ 뺸 ǽû ﵵ ̸ Ʈ   ѱ۷ ϰ 뿡 ־ ġ ũ λ£ ũ鸸 ġϿ , г ѱ۷ ̷ Ʈ 뿡 ǰϿ û ⰢϿ. ׷, ǽû ̷ 2005 11 ٽ Ʈ ѱ۷ λ , ũ ϰ , Ӷ, Ҹžü ũ ġϿ¹, ̴ û ʰ Ǵ ֿ ϴ ļμ û ɸ ư ٰŸ Ѵٴ ̴.

, ü ɸ Ͽ, 켱 û ǥ 缺 Ͽ, û ﵵ̸ û ǥ SAMS CLUB s Ÿ ̿ ̸̶ Ѵ. ƿ﷯, ûǿ ־ ǽû ϴ Ʈ  ϴ Һڵ ϰ Ƿ 缺 Ǵܵ  ϴ Һڵ ߽ ǴϿ Ѵٰ Ѵ.

ǽûο ﵵ̸ Ǹ Ȥ ʴ´ٴ Ͽ, û ǽû SAM CLUB̶ ǥ ϰ ƴϸ, ǰ̳ Ͽ  ϰ ƴϰ, ǽû ˷ ŵ ƴѴٰ Ѵ. , ǿ ־ ǽû λ£ õ ũ ϴ Ͽ ϰ ﵵ̸ ϰ ִٰ Ͽ, λ£ õ κ Ʈ ν ǽû ٰŰ ǵǾٰ Ѵ.

Ͽ, û ѹα ̱ SAMS CLUB ǥ忡 ǥ , û ϴ Ʈwww.samsclub.com û ǥ ϰ ִ , ǽû ڽ Ʈ ¶ ο ϸ鼭 μ û Ʈ ο  ߾ ǽû û ǥ Ȥ Ʈ ϰ ־ٰ , ǽû Ʈ  ߽ ǥϴ û  ջ ϰ ִ , û ϴ Ͱ ǰ 񽺸 ϴ ũ Ʈ ϰ ְ õ Ǵ , Һ Ÿ ̿ typosquatting ʿ شϴ , <ipcworld.com>, <newsweek.net>, <nasdaqmarket.com>, <mybeatles.com> <worldcupinfo.com> Ǹ ƴ ̸ ټ , ϰ ִ  ԰Ͽ ȴٰ ϰ ִ.

B. ǽû

ǽû 켱 û ɸ ο Ͽ, û ο Ŵ ǽû ϴ Ʈ ¶ ο Ǿٴ ι, û Ӱ Ѵٴ Ʈ Ǵ ʰ Ǿ Ʈ ٸ ̰ ̸, г û ǽû Ʈ ٸ Ʈ ũǾ Ǿٴ Ǵ Ͽ ̹Ƿ, ɸ ٰŰ ο ð ־ٰ ٰ Ѵ.

ü Ǵܰ Ͽ, û ǥ 缺 Ͽ ؼ, ǽû ֱ ڵ Ǵ ϸ鼭, ǽû ֱ ѹα ﵵ̸ Ϻθ ϴ sam [sm] ƴ [sam] , ѹα  λ Īϴ μ [sam] sam Ϲ club Ͽ ﵵ̸ ǽû ǥ ̿ 缺 ƴѴٰ Ѵ.

ﵵ̸ Ǹ Ͽ, ǽû sam ѱο λ Īϴ ŭ ̸ þ ̷ ﵵ̸ Ǹ Գ ִٰ Ѵ. , ǽû ̷ ̸ ϰ ⿡ ͳ ϴ ϴ ϴ ȸμ, ﵵ̸ Ǹ Ȥ ϰ ִ ̸, û û Ʈ Ʈ پ õ ȯ Ұ ̶ Ͽ.

, Ͽ Ͽ, ǽû ﵵ̸ ǽû ȣ Ͽ Ʈ 浵 ٿ Ʈ  ȯ ҰϿǷ ٰ ϰ ִ.

 

6. Ǵ

, ǰ û, ǽû, ﵵ̸ û Ͽ ɸ ִ ο Ǵ ü ȿ Ǵܿ ư Ѵ.

ǰ û, ǽû, ﵵ̸ ϴ û ɸ û(re-filing) شѴٴ ǹ .

ɸ ο Ͽ ʴ¹, û ɸ θ Ͽ ɿ Ϲ λҼ۹Ģ Ǵ ۿ (Societe Nationale de Television France3 輼, WIPO ǹȣ D2002-1181 ). ̿ ɸ û ǵ ɸϿ г ü ʱ ɸ û Grove Broadcasting Co. Ltd. Telesystems Communications Ltd.(WIPO ǹȣ D2000-0703) Creo Products Inc. Website in Development (WIPO ǹȣ D2000-1490) Ģ Ȯ Ͽ Ͽ Ģ .

û, ǽû ﵵ̸ ǰ ɸ, (a) ǿ ־ г, ȣ, ߴ ־ , (b) Ȥ ۵ Ű Ǿ , (c) ɸ ߵ ƴϿų ߿ϰ ź ִ Ű ߰ߵ , (d) ڿ 谡 ־  ȴ. (c) 쿡 ־, ο Ŵ ɸ ÿ ո μ , ߿ ġ ̾ ϸ, ź ִ ̾ Ѵ.

ǿ ־, û ̷ Ŀ ǽû ̸ Ʈ ٰŷ ɸ ûϰ ְ, ǽû û (λ Ұϴ ѱ DZ ) Ʈ ԽõǾ ־ Ŀ Խõ 뵿 μ ̴ Creo ǿ õ û ٰŸ ϴ ԰ û شϿ ϵǾ Ѵٴ Ѵ.

û û ϴ ̷ ﵵ̸ Ʈ λ Ұϴ ѱ ũ ϴ ü ִٰ ι, ǽû ޸ Ŀ ߻ ɸ û Ǵܵȴ.

̷ Ǵ Ͽ, ǽû Ʈ ϼ ʾ ƴ϶ 뵵 ̿ǰ ִٴ ǿ ԰Ͽ ̷ Ʈ û Ʈ Ű ǽû Ʈ ûΰ ϴٴ Խø ɸ (AT&T Corp. William Gormally, WIPO ǹȣ D2005-0758), ɸ Ʈ Ϲ ϴ ̾ Ͽ ɸ û Ʈ ũ ϴ ̹Ƿ ߿ ִٰ ɸ (Kur-und Verkehrsverein St. Moritz Domain Finance Ltd., WIPO ǹȣ D2004-0158), ǽû Ʈ û ǥ Ե Ÿ±(meta-tag) Ե Ÿ ο Ÿ ʷ ɸ (Legal & General Group Plc Image Plus, WIPO ǹȣ D2003-0603), ǽû ֿ ٰŰ Ǿ ǽû ī Ʈ ϰ Ż Ʈ ٰŷ ɸ (Maruti Udyog Ltd. maruti.com, WIPO ǹȣ D2003-0073) , 쿡 ־ Ʈ ǽû ο ɸ ո μ ź ƴ϶ ٰŰ ҿ ߿ ġ ο š ̸, ܼ Ǵ ʰ Ǿ 뵿 ݺ ҰϿ ο Ŷ (Furrytails Limited Andrew Mitchell d/b/a Oxford Die-Cast, WIPO ǹȣ D2001-0857)ʹ ٸ ϰڴ.

̿ , г ɸ ư Ѵ.

û 4 (a)׿ ǰϿ ǵ Ͽ û ִ.

(i) û Ǹ ִ ǥ Ǵ ǥ ̸ ϰų ȥ ų ϴٴ ,

(ii) ̸ Ͽ Ǹ Ǵ ƴϴٴ , ׸

(iii) ̸ ǰ ִٴ ͡

A. ǥ ̸ ϡ缺

û ̱ ѹα SAMS CLUB ǥ Ͽ ǥ 纻  Ͽ ȴ.

ﵵ̸ û ǥ ȥ ų δ г ٿ Ǵü ΰ ޶ ִ. ǽû ϴ ٿ ﵵ̸ Ϻθ ϴ sam λ Ȥ 3 ϴ [sam] ɼ ٺ ǽû ֱ, ѹα ڵ Ѵٸ 缺 ϱⰡ ̴.

׷, ﵵ̸ Ʈ Ǿ ǰ ִٸ, ﵵ ̸ û Ǵ ǽû ڵ ƴ Ʈ ϴ ̳ ɼ ִ Ͽ 缺 θ Ǻϴ Ÿ ̴.

ﵵ̸ ѹα ڵ ֵ ڷ ϴ Ȯ co.kr ƴ Ϲ Ȯ com ϰ ִ. , Ȯڸ ٰŷ ̳, ǿ ־ ǽû Ʈ Ǿ ̷ ƴ϶ ѹα ۿ ġϿ ̱ Һڵ鿡 θ ˷ ü Ʈ ũ ϰ ִ. ׷ٸ, ﵵ̸ Ʈ Ȯ, , , Ʈ Ȥ ѹα ڿ ƴϰ  ϴ Ѵٰ ִ.

̷ Ͽ 缺 Ǵ ,  ͼ Һڵ̶ sam [sam]ٴ [sm] ɼ ſ . Ǵ Ѵٸ, ﵵ̸ û ǥ SAMS CLUB Īϴ s μ ܰ Ȥ  ϴ 鿡 ȥ ϴٰ ϰڴ (V Secret Catalogue, Inc., Victorias Secret Catalogue, LLC., Victorias Secret Stores, Inc., Intimate Beauty Corp.d/b/a Victorias Secret Beauty PM Websites, NAF ǹȣ 94652 ).

B. ǽû Ǹ Ǵ

ûο ﵵ̸ ǥ Ǹ Ȯεǰ ִ¹, û ŵ Ͽ û ǽûο ǥ Ȥ ﵵ̸ Ǹ 絵ϰų ƴϹǷ, ǽûο ﵵ̸ Ǹ Ǵ ʴ´ٴ Ͽ ̷ ϰڴ.

, ǽû ǿ ѹα ﵵ̸ λ Ȥ ȫ ٷ Ʈ νĵ Ƿ ̿ ﵵ ̸ ݻ ѹα ڷμ ﵵ̸ Ǹ ִٰ ν, λ ǰ ǸŸ Ʈ غϿٰ ִ ׺ Ͽ ̷ ׺ г κ ٰŷ ۿϿ. ׷, ǽû Ʈ Ͽ Ϲ ũ ϴ λ ũ Ȥ λ Ű ׸ Ʈ Ĺݺο ġν ǽû ׺ ǽ ʸ Ͽ.

ǿ ̸ ǽû ׺ ݺ԰ ƿ﷯, ǽû ̷ ̸ ϰ ϵ ̸ Ͽ ϴ ȸθŭ ﵵ̸ Ʈ  ų پ õϴ 翬 ̸, û ϴ Ͱ Ʈ Ʈ õ ȯ Ұϴٰ ׺Ѵ. , μ ǽû ﵵ̸ յ Ʈ ̿Ͽ  ϴ 鿡 ϴ ÿ λ ִ Һڵ鿡 Ʈ ϰڴٴ ִٰ Ͽ, 庸 ִ.

׷, û ϴ г ﵵ̸ Ʈ Ȯ ϸ, ǽû ɸ û Ǵ Ͱ ÿ ٽ Ʈ Ͽ Ϲ ũ ϰ ѱ۷ ̷ λ , ǰҰ ַ ϴ Ʈ ϰ ִ. ᱹ, ǽû Ʈ ݺν ׺ ո ǽ ҷ Ű ִ ̴.

̿ʹ , ǽûο ﵵ̸ Ǹ Ǵ Ȳ ϴ θ Ѵ.

4 (c) ŵ鿡 Ȳ Ǵ 쿡 ﵵ̸ ǽû Ǹ Ǵ ƾ Ѵٰ ϰ ִ.

(i) ̸ ޱ ǰ Ǵ Ͽ ̸ Ǵ ̿ ϴ Ī ϰ ־ų غ ϰ ־

(ii) (, ̳ Ÿ üμ) ǥ̳ ǥ ʴ ̸ Ϲݿ θ νĵǰ ־

(iii) ̸ ؼ Һڸ νŰų õ ǥ ǥ 񼮽Ű ƴ϶ Ǵ ϰ ִ 족

켱, (i) ǽû ŵ Ʈ Ͽ Ǹ ǽ ϹǷ ̿ ִٰ . , (ii) Ͽ  ſ Ͽ ǽû ﵵ̸ θ ˷ ִٰ ʰ ִ. (iii) , Ŀ ǽû Ʈ Ͽ ǽû ü ũ Ͽ( û ϴ SAMS CLUB ũ δ) չ, ̳ ϰ ִٴ ǿ ̷ٰ ƴ.

׷ٸ, ûο Ͽ ǽû ﵵ̸ Ǹ ǿ ̷ ¿, ǽû ̿ ׺ ϰ Ӵ 4(c) Ȳ ƴϹǷ, ǽûο ﵵ̸ Ǹ ʴ´ٰ ̴.

C. ǽû

ٿ 4 (a) (iii) ﵵ̸ (bad faith) ϵǾ ߿ ִٴ ûο 䱸ϰ ִ. ﵵ (a) (b) 뿡 ־ Ǿ ϴ ؼȴ.

г SAMS CLUB ѹα ȣ ƴٰ ǽû ﵵ̸ û ǥ SAMS CLUB ˰ ﵵ̸ Ͽٰ ƴٰ ǴϿ.

ǿ ̸, û ѹα ̱ SAMS CLUB ǥ忡 ǥ Ǿ ִ , û Ʈ www.samsclub.com û ǥ ϰ ִ , ǽû ڽ Ʈ ¶ ο ϸ鼭 μ û Ʈ ο ٰŷ Ͽ ǽû ﵵ̸ ú û ȣ ϰ ־ ̶ ϰ ִ. ׷, ǽû ﵵ̸ ϴ û ȣ ϰ ־ , ǽû ﵵ̸ ÿ ̸ ϰ ־ٰ ̷ ƴϿ. û ȣ ѹα ǥ ϵ dz, ǥ ü Ͽ 3 ¹ ﵵ̸ ÿ ־ ȣ ѹα θ ǰų ˷ ־ٰ ƴϴ ̴.

, 4 (a) (iii) Ϲ ̷ ƴϿ.

, 4 (b) Ʒ Ư Ȳ Ǵ 쿡 ﵵ̸ ̶ ϰ ִ.

(i) ǥڳ ǥ û Ǵ û ڿ ؼ ̸ õ ʰϴ 밡 ޱ Ͽ ̸ Ǹ, 뿩, Ǵ ϴ ֵ ̸ Ǵ

(ii) ǥڳ ǥڷ Ͽ ǥ ǥ ϴ ̸ ϱ Ͽ ̸ μ ׷ ݺ

(iii) ֵ ̸

(iv) ̸ ̿ν ̵ Ʈ Ÿ ¶ Ǵ ϴ ǰ̳ ó, Ŀ, ŷ ް, õ  Ͽ û ǥ ǥ ȥ ߱ ǵ ͳݻ ̿ڸ Ʈ Ǵ Ÿ ¶ ҷ 족

Ȳ ǿ Ǵ Ѵ.

ռ ٿ ÿ ǽû û ȣ ϰ ־ٰ ƴϹǷ, ǽû ȣ 縦 ˰ ־ 4 (b) (i) (ii)ȣ شϴ Ȳ ƴѴ. , ÿ ǽû ȣ õ û ϰ ־ٰ ϱ⵵ Ƿ, 4 (b) (iii)ȣ Ȳ ƴѴ.

4 (b) (iv)ȣ شϴ Ȳ , (i) (ii) (iii)ȣ Ǵ¹, ̴ (iv)ȣ ﵵ̸ ǵ ȣ θ ʰ ֱ ̴.

ǿ û ſ ϸ ǽû ﵵ̸ Կ ־ û ȣ ̸ Ǵ Ʈ www.overstock.com ü Ʈ ũ ϴ û ǥ ȥ ߽ Ϸ ǹǷ, ؼ 4 (b) (iv)ȣ Ȳ Ǿ Ǿٰ ̴.

׷, 4 (b) (i) (iv)ȣ Ȳ Ǵ 쿡 롱 ϱ ι, ܼ ؼ Ͽ Ŀ ߻ ﵵ Ȳ Ǿٰ ϴ ո̶ ϱ ƴٰ ȴ.

̿ Ͽ The Skin Store, Inc. eSkinStore.com (WIPO ǹȣ D2004-0661) г 4 (b) (iv) Ͽ Ϲ ̷ ɸϿ г, ̸ ϵǴ ־ ǽû û Ǵ û ǥ, ǥ ˰ ־ ƴ϶ û ¼ ٴ ظ Ծ. ׷, (iv)ȣ, ȣ ޸, ̸ û ǵ ؼ ƹ ϰ ƴϴ. , ڸ, ÿ ƴϿٰ ϴ ǵ ٷ 롱 ֵȴٰ (iv)ȣ ϴ δ. г ̸ ۼ Ǽ Ǵϰ ̷ ϴ(Generally, panels deciding these disputes have taken the view that a complaint cannot succeed unless at the outset, when registering the Domain Name, the Respondent did so with the Complainant and/or its trade/service mark in mind. It is to be noted, however, that sub-paragraph (iv), unlike the three preceding sub-paragraphs, makes no reference to the Respondents motives at time of registration of the Domain Name. Accordingly, on the face of it, intentional bad faith use is deemed to be bad faith registration and use for the purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy even though the bad faith intent may not have existed at the time of registration. The Panel believes that this may well have been a drafting error, but for the purpose of this dispute, it does not matter) ִ.

г ̷ ؿ ϴ¹, ո ؼ Ͽ (iv)ȣ 쿡 ÿ ־ ǽû ּ û ȣ ϰ ־ Ǿ ̴. ׷, 쿡 ̷ Ͽ.

ᱹ, ǽû ﵵ̸ ϰ Ͽٴ ƴѴ.

 

7.

г û ﵵ̸ Ͽ 4 (a)׿ ŵ ׵ ǴѴ. , 4 Ģ 15 ǰϿ û û ̸ ⰢѴ.



г



г

: 2006 6 20


DISSENTING OPINION

I concur with my distinguished co-Panelists that the Complaint presents a new dispute that the Panel must consider. I also concur that the Complainant has successfully shown that: the domain name in dispute is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the [C]omplainant has rights; and the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name. Paragraph 4(a)(i) and (ii) of the Policy. I disagree, however, that the Complainant has failed to show that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. Paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy. I would find that the evidentiary record of this case establishes the bad faith requirement, and would order the transfer of the domain name to the Complainant. Therefore, I dissent from the decision of the majority denying the Complaint.

The bad faith element as described in the Policy has given rise to significant discussion by panels in previous decisions. Some panels have ruled that paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy requires proof of both bad faith registration and bad faith use. See Teradyne, Inc. Teradyne, Inc. v. 4Tel Technology, WIPO Case No. D2000-0026 (May 9, 2000); World Wrestling Federation Entertainment, Inc. v. Bosman, WIPO Case No. D1999-0001 (January 14, 2000). Presumably, this view originates from the strict text of paragraph 4(a)(iii): domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. (emphasis added). Thus, according to this reading of the Policy, if there is no evidence of bad faith at the time of registration, the panel must rule in favor of the respondent, even if the respondent has subsequently used the domain name in bad faith. Dean Hill Systems Ltd. v. Santana, WIPO Case No. D2002-0404 (September 20, 2002) (Concurrence of David H. Bernstein) (discussing E-Duction, Inc. v. Zuccarini, WIPO Case No. D2000-1369 (February 5, 2001)).

Yet a complete reading of the Policy must take into account paragraph 4(b) of the Policy, which begins: For the purposes of Paragraph 4(a)(iii), the following circumstances, in particular but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be present, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith[.] (emphasis added). One panelist ably explained the co-existing relationship between Paragraphs 4(a)(iii) and 4(b)(iv):

While Paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy requires that the Complainant prove that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith, that requirement is further illuminated by the language of Paragraph 4(b) addressing Evidence of Registration and Use in Bad Faith. Paragraph 4(b) expressly delineates four, each free-standing, examples of what a panel may find to be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith, but first underscores that these examples are not the exclusive basis for finding registration and use in bad faith . . . . Dean Hill Systems Ltd., No. D2002-0404 (Concurrence of Sally M. Abel), supra.

Applying the Policy then, panels in previous decisions have ruled that the complainant may satisfy the requirement of registration and use in bad faith as set forth in paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy with evidence of any of the non-exhaustive circumstances described in paragraph 4(b). Sydney Airport Corporation Limited v. Crilly, WIPO Case No. D2005-0989 (November 22, 2005); Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows, WIPO Case No. D2000-0003 (February 18, 2000).

Here, I would find paragraph 4(a)(iii) to be present, supported by evidence to satisfy the circumstances described in paragraph 4(b)(iv), namely, that by using the domain name the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to [the Respondents] web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the [C]omplainants mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of [the Respondents] web site or location or of a product or service on [the Respondents] web site or location.

The evidentiary record before the Panel shows that:

The Complainants service mark,SAMS CLUB was registered in the United States of America in 1997, and has been a well-known mark for retail services.

The SAMS CLUB mark was also registered in other countries, including the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in 1999, and China in 1997.

The SAMS CLUB mark was registered in the Republic of Korea in 1998.

The Complainant registered the domain name <samsclub.com> in 1995, and has been using it to provide information about SAMS CLUB stores and allow members to shop online.

Years after the Complainant registered the SAMS CLUB mark in the United States of America, China, and the Republic of Korea, and after the Complainant registered the domain name <samsclub.com>, the Respondent registered the domain name in dispute here: <samclub.com>. As of April 2005, the contents of the Respondents website, all in English text, included links entitled Online Payment, Furniture, Club, Tires, Work From Home, Airline Tickets and Portable DVD Player, among others.

There is more. The Complainant had previously brought an administrative proceeding under the Policy against the Respondent in May 2005. After receiving notice of the complaint, the Respondent changed the English content of its website to Korean text, devoted to ginseng products. The Respondent then argued in its response that it has rights or legitimate interests in the domain name, asserting that sam refers to the Korean term for ginseng and club is a common term in Korean. The panel agreed, and denied the complaint. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. iContents, WIPO Case No. D2005-0492 (June 28, 2005). Within five months of the panels decision, the Respondent changed the language of the website from Korean back to English, removed material relating to ginseng, and replaced it with a search engine. Over the course of the next three months, the Respondent provided in the website, in successive order: textual material under the title Online Holiday Shopping Tips ? SamClub; text under the title Online Shopping tips & Coupon tips ? SamClub; a SamClub Directory heading, with product categories under it; text under the title Coupon clipping takes time, but pays off ? SamClub; and text under the title Valentines Day Gift Ideas for Him ? SamClub, among others. During this time, as the Complainant acknowledges, the Respondents website did include two links to ginseng products, but mostly at the bottom right portion of the site content. The Complainant then brought the present Complaint challenging the websites English content. Within hours after the Complainant transmitted the Complaint to the Respondent by e-mail, the Respondent removed the English content from the website and replaced it with Korean text providing information about ginseng products, just as it had done when it received the previous complaint.

In my view, the evidentiary record satisfies the circumstances provided for in paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. That is, the Respondent used the <samclub.com> domain name, intentionally attempting to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainants SAMS CLUB mark, as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of the Respondents website. The record and the Policy make it difficult for me to reject a finding of bad faith.

The majority declines to find bad faith registration, but finds ample evidence of bad faith use. Significantly, bad faith registration and bad faith use can overlap, and are not strictly separated by the registration event. Or as one panel aptly stated, [B]ad faith use may, in appropriate cases, give rise to an inference of bad faith registration. E-Duction, Inc., D2000-1369, supra. The evidentiary record of the present case shows that this is one such appropriate case.

The majoritys decision all but endorses the Respondent to change the content of its website back to the original English content, for another time, freely including material related to the same or similar retail services for which the Complainant has long used its registered mark. I disagree with this result. Although it is true that [t]he Policy is not suitable for the resolution of all disputes, Formway Furniture Limited v. Microfish Pty Limited, WIPO Case No. D2001-1476 (February 23, 2002) (emphasis added), I think that observation inappropriate here. Instead, in my view, the present case offers an example of the unique sets of facts as to the type of behavior the Policy is intended to address. Dean Hill Systems, D2002-0404 (Concurrence of Panelist Abel), supra.

I therefore respectfully dissent from the majoritys decision denying the Complaint.


Lee, Ilhyung
Dissenting Panelist

Dated: June 20, 2006