About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center

Alternative Dispute Resolution Proceeding

Case No. DSE2018-0014

1. Petitioner:

The Petitioner is NVIDIA Corporation of United States of America ("US"), represented by SafeNames Ltd., United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ("UK").

2. Domain Holder

The Domain Holder is A. K. of India.

3. Domain Name and Procedural History

This Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding relates to the domain name <geforce.se>.

This Petition was filed under the Terms and Conditions of registration (the ".se Policy") and the Instructions governing Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding for domain names in the top-level domain .se (the ".se Rules").

The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ("the Center") verified that the Petition satisfied the formal requirements of the .se Policy and the .se Rules. In accordance with Section 13 of the .se Rules, the Center formally notified the Domain Holder of the Petition on March 21, 2018. The Domain Holder did not submit any response and, accordingly, the Center notified the Domain Holder's default on April 23, 2018.

The Center appointed Per Carlson as the sole Arbitrator in this matter on May 2, 2018. The Arbitrator has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with Section 1 of the .se Rules.

4. Factual Background

The Petitioner is the holder of inter alia the European Union (EU) trademark GEFORCE (No. 002778140), registered on March 29, 2006, for, Integrated circuits, semiconductors and chipsets in the field of media, multi-media and communications processors in class 9.

The Domain Holder is the holder of the domain name <geforce.se>, registered on November 9, 2017.

5. Claim

The Petitioner has requested that the domain name <geforce.se> be transferred to the Petitioner.

The Domain Holder has been invited to respond to the Petition, but has failed to comply with the deadline for the submission of Response.

6. The Petitioner's Contentions

In support of its claim the Petitioner has relied on the grounds, that the domain name <geforce.se> is identical to the Petitioner's GEFORCE trademark, that the domain name has been registered in bad faith and that the Domain Holder has no rights to or justified interest in the domain name.

The Petitioner has stated that the trademark GEFORCE has acquired secondary meaning in relation to the Petitioner's graphics processing units (GPUs) and mobile processor chipsets which are used to power a broad range of products ranging from smartphones to high-end personal computers.

The Petitioner has alleged that the Domain Holder contacted the Petitioner two days only after the registration of the domain name, that the Domain Holder in this communication inquired if the Petitioner was interested in acquiring the domain name <geforce.se> and that it therefor is clear that the Domain Holder knew of the Petitioner at the time of the domain name registration and registered the domain name in view to sell it to the Petitioner.

7. Discussion and Findings

In accordance with article 7.2 of the .se Policy, a domain name may be transferred to the party requesting dispute resolution proceedings, if the following three conditions are fulfilled:

1. the domain name is identical or similar to a trade symbol (trademark or service mark), which is legally recognized in Sweden and to which the party requesting dispute resolution can prove its rights,

2. the domain name has been registered or used in bad faith, and

3. the Domain Holder has no rights or justified interest in the domain name.

The Petitioner is the holder of inter alia the EU trademark GEFORCE, legally binding in Sweden. The domain name <geforce.se> is identical to the Petitioner's trademark GEFORCE.

It is clear from the record, that the Domain Holder contacted the Petitioner, two days after the registration of the domain name <geforce.se>, and inquired if the Petitioner was interested in acquiring the domain name.

Therefore, it is obvious that the Domain Holder registered the domain name <geforce.se> in order to offer it to the Petitioner and consequently registered the domain name in bad faith. And the Domain Holder, who has not responded to the Petition, has not submitted any evidence that he has any rights or justified interest in the domain name.

For the foregoing reasons, the domain name <geforce.se> shall be transferred to the Petitioner.

8. Decision

The domain name <geforce.se> shall be transferred to the Petitioner.

9. Summary

It has been established that the domain name <geforce.se> is identical to the EU trademark GEFORCE (No. 002778140). Furthermore, based on the record, it has been considered clear that the domain name has been registered in bad faith. In addition, the Domain Holder, who has not responded to the Petition, has not provided any evidence that he has any rights or justified interest in the domain name. Accordingly, the domain name <geforce.se> shall be transferred to the Petitioner.

Per Carlson
Date: May 31, 2018