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

Accelerated Proceeding

Case No. DSE2017-0003

1. Petitioner

The Petitioner is MAJE S.A.S., France.

2. Domain Holder

The Domain Holder is S.M.M.J., Sweden.

3. Domain Name and Procedural History

Alternative dispute resolution proceeding regarding the domain name <maje.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”).

4. Factual Background

The Petitioner is the owner of the International Trademark Registration IR 801247 MAJE (word), registered November 28, 2002 for goods in classes 9, 14, 18 and 25, and covering a number of countries, including Sweden.

The disputed domain name was first registered on June 7, 2005, and does not resolve to an active website.

On July 6, 2017, the Petitioner filed a Petition with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the Center) for an Alternative dispute resolution for the domain name <maje.se>, desiring that it be transferred to the Petitioner and that, if there was no response by the Domain Holder to the Petition, the case would be determined by the ADR Accelerated Proceeding.

On July 21, 2017, the Center notified the Domain Holder of the Petition, and gave the Domain Holder the possibility to respond no later than August 20, 2017. The Domain Holder did not respond within the given time.

On August 29, 2017, the Center appointed Mr. Petter Rindforth as Arbitrator pursuant to Section 6, paragraph 2 of the .se Rules to announce a decision on or before September 8, 2017.

5. Claim

The Petitioner claims that the domain name <maje.se> shall be transferred to the Petitioner.

6. Parties’ Contentions

A. Petitioner

The trademark MAJE was created 1998 in Paris by Judith Milgrom, and is used for “ready-to-wear”. The Petitioner is the owner of the trademark MAJE, currently existing in almost 200 stores all around the world, including Sweden.

The Petitioner states that the disputed domain name <maje.se> is identical to the trademark MAJE.

According to the Petitioner, the Domain Holder has no rights or legitimate interests in <maje.se>, and is not related in any way with the Petitioner. The Domain Holder does not carry out any activity for, nor has any business with the Petitioner.

Furthermore, the website in connexion with the disputed domain name <maje.se> is inactive since its registration.

The Petitioner concludes that the Domain Holder has registered the disputed domain name <maje.se> with the sole aim to prevent the Petitioner to register it.

Finally, the Petitioner claims that <maje.se> was registered and is being used in bad faith. The disputed domain name <maje.se> is identical to the Petitioner’s prior trademark MAJE, and the addition of the ccTLD “.se” does not change the overall impression of the designation as being connected to the trademark MAJE of the Petitioner.

The trademark MAJE is exploited in the whole world, especially in Europe and in Sweden.

B. Domain Holder

The Domain Holder did not file any response.

7. Discussion and Findings

A. The disputed domain name is identical to the trademark MAJE, which is legally binding in Sweden and to which the Petitioner can prove its rights.

B. Based on the record, the Arbitrator finds the disputed domain name has been registered in bad faith.

C. Based on the record, the Arbitrator finds the Domain Holder has no rights or justified interests in the disputed domain name.

8. Decision

For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Section 21 of the .se Rules and Section 7.2 of the .se Policy, the Arbitrator orders that the domain name <maje.se> shall be transferred to the Petitioner.

September 8, 2017
Petter Rindforth

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/