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

ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION

Swissquote Group Holding SA v. Super Privacy Service LTD c/o Dynadot

Case No. D2019-2364

1. The Parties

The Complainant is Swissquote Group Holding SA, Switzerland, represented by Inlex IP Expertise, France.

The Respondent is Super Privacy Service LTD c/o Dynadot, United States of America.

2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name <swisquote.com> is registered with Dynadot, LLC (the “Registrar”).

3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on September 30, 2019. On September 30, 2019, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On October 2, 2019, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that the Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details.

The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).

In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on October 9, 2019. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was October 29, 2019. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on October 30, 2019. Between November 1 and 4, 2019, the Center received several email communications from an unidentified third party.

The Center appointed Clive Duncan Thorne as the sole panelist in this matter on November 14, 2019. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.

4. Factual Background

The Complainant is a Swiss company that provides online banking, foreign exchange and trading services. It is also regarded as one of Switzerland’s leading providers of online financial and trading services.

The Complainant owns trade mark rights in the mark SWISSQUOTE in respect of advertising, financial and other services which were registered prior to the registration of the disputed domain name <swisquote.com> which was registered on October 9, 2018. In particular the Complainant relies upon International Registration SWISSQUOTE no. 1132411 designating the countries of the European Union (“EU”) in classes 35, 36 and 38, registered on August 20, 2012, and International Registration SWISSQUOTE (plus device) No. 742603 designating Germany, the countries of the EU, Spain, France and Italy in classes 35 and 36 registered on August 31, 2000. Copies of the certificates of registration for these marks are exhibited at Annex 5 to the Complaint.

The Complainant is also the owner of several domain names and in particular <swissquote.com > registered on February 14, 1997. A copy of the relevant WhoIs search is exhibited at Annex 6 to the Complaint.

According to evidence submitted by the Complainant, the disputed domain name redirects to a website of an online forex broker.

In the absence of a Response and any evidence to the contrary the Panel finds the above evidence as to the Complainant’s rights to be true and proceeds to determine this Complaint accordingly.

5. Parties’ Contentions

A. Complainant

The Complainant submits:

i. That the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trade marks SWISSQUOTE in which it has rights.

ii. There is no evidence of the Respondent being entitled to rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.

iii. On the evidence the disputed domain name is both registered and used in bad faith by the Respondent. The Complainant relies upon the fact that registration of the disputed domain name was made anonymously and that it has been used in bad faith by being used to redirect users to an identical or similar service to that offered by the Complainant.

B. Respondent

The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions. However, the Center received several email communications in Chinese from an unidentified third party, asking for the language of proceeding to be Chinese. According to the evidence provided by the Complainant, the same third party has previously contacted the Complainant and offered the disputed domain name for sale. In any case, those communications will not change the outcome of this Decision.

6. Discussion and Findings

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar

The Panel, as set out in section 4 above, has found that the Complainant owns trade mark rights in the marks SWISSQUOTE and SWISSQUOTE (plus device). The Complainant submits that the only difference between these marks (apart from the lack of a device which in the Panel’s view is immaterial for this purpose) and the disputed domain name is that the disputed domain name is spelt using one letter “s” rather than two letters “s” as used in the trade marks i.e. consistent with “Swiss” as descriptive of Switzerland.

The Complainant asserts that the difference is “obviously not sufficient to outweigh their high degrees of similarities“. The Panel agrees with this submission and finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the marks SWISSQUOTE and SWISSQUOTE (plus device) in which the Complainant has rights.

In accordance with paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy the Panel finds for the Complainant in respect of this element.

B. Rights or Legitimate Interests

The Complainant points out that there is no evidence of any link between it and the Respondent nor is there any evidence of the Respondent having any rights or legitimate interests to the disputed domain name.

In particular, it points out that the disputed domain name is registered anonymously and that this may be regarded as an indication that the Respondent is willing to hide his identity because he has no such rights.

Moreover there is no evidence that the Respondent has been authorized by the Complainant to use either SWISSQUOTE or SWISQUOTE. There is no business relationship between the parties.

The Complainant also relies upon the fact that there is no evidence that the disputed domain name is being used in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services. This is supported by evidence of bad faith referred to in section 6 C below.

In these circumstances and taking into account there is no evidence submitted by the Respondent the Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights nor legitimate interests in the disputed domain name within paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy.

C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith

The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name is registered in bad faith because the Complainant is “widely known” as an online financial trading house in Switzerland and publishes an “eponymous” magazine, it is quoted on the Swiss stock exchange and its business and marks have existed for more than 20 years prior to registration of the disputed domain name.

The Complainant also relies upon five earlier UDRP decisions in which it was successful in protecting the mark SWISSQUOTE.

Taken together this supports a finding of registration in bad faith because, as is put by the Complainant, the Respondent could not ignore while registering the disputed domain name the prior existence of the Complainant’s trade marks and business activity. It asserts that the disputed domain name was registered “precisely because it (the Respondent) knew the Complainant’s existence, prior rights and its activity”.

The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name is used in bad faith because there is no legitimate or fair use of the domain name. This is evidenced by the fact that the domain name is redirecting directly to the website pages “www.icmarkets.com/au/en/?camp=24184” (exhibited at Annex 12 to the Complaint). The website is owned by IC Markets which is an online forex broker. The disputed domain name is therefore redirecting to a website offering a service which is identical or very similar to the services delivered by the Complainant. In the Panel’s view this is sufficient to establish use in bad faith.

The Complainant also submits that when the Complainant on August 20, 2019, contacted the Respondent through its registrar to ascertain whether the disputed domain name was for sale it received a reply from the email address “[...]@gg.com” that it was for sale for USD 15,000 excluding a handling fee. This is well in excess of the transfer costs and is additional evidence of use in bad faith.

Taking into account the above evidence and lack of a Response the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is registered and used in bad faith within paragraphs 4(a)(iii) and 4(b) of the Policy.

7. Decision

For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4 (i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name <swisquote.com> be transferred to the Complainant.

Clive Duncan Thorne
Sole Panelist
Date: November 22, 2019

https://www3.wipo.int/contact/en/area.jsp?area=arbitration https://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/ https://www.wipo.int/tools/en/disclaim.html https://www.wipo.int/en/web/privacy-policy/ https://www.wipo.int/en/web/accessibility/ https://www.wipo.int/tools/en/sitemap.html https://www3.wipo.int/newsletters/en/ https://www.wipo.int/podcasts/en/ https://www.wipo.int/news/en/