Propiedad intelectual Formación en PI Divulgación de la PI La PI para... La PI y… La PI en… Información sobre patentes y tecnología Información sobre marcas Información sobre diseños industriales Información sobre las indicaciones geográficas Información sobre las variedades vegetales (UPOV) Leyes, tratados y sentencias de PI Recursos de PI Informes sobre PI Protección por patente Protección de las marcas Protección de diseños industriales Protección de las indicaciones geográficas Protección de las variedades vegetales (UPOV) Solución de controversias en materia de PI Soluciones operativas para las oficinas de PI Pagar por servicios de PI Negociación y toma de decisiones Cooperación para el desarrollo Apoyo a la innovación Colaboraciones público-privadas La Organización Trabajar con la OMPI Rendición de cuentas Patentes Marcas Diseños industriales Indicaciones geográficas Derecho de autor Secretos comerciales Academia de la OMPI Talleres y seminarios Día Mundial de la PI Revista de la OMPI Sensibilización Casos prácticos y casos de éxito Novedades sobre la PI Premios de la OMPI Empresas Universidades Pueblos indígenas Judicatura Recursos genéticos, conocimientos tradicionales y expresiones culturales tradicionales Economía Igualdad de género Salud mundial Cambio climático Política de competencia Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible Observancia de los derechos Tecnologías de vanguardia Aplicaciones móviles Deportes Turismo PATENTSCOPE Análisis de patentes Clasificación Internacional de Patentes ARDI - Investigación para la innovación ASPI - Información especializada sobre patentes Base Mundial de Datos sobre Marcas Madrid Monitor Base de datos Artículo 6ter Express Clasificación de Niza Clasificación de Viena Base Mundial de Datos sobre Dibujos y Modelos Boletín de Dibujos y Modelos Internacionales Base de datos Hague Express Clasificación de Locarno Base de datos Lisbon Express Base Mundial de Datos sobre Marcas para indicaciones geográficas Base de datos de variedades vegetales PLUTO Base de datos GENIE Tratados administrados por la OMPI WIPO Lex: leyes, tratados y sentencias de PI Normas técnicas de la OMPI Estadísticas de PI WIPO Pearl (terminología) Publicaciones de la OMPI Perfiles nacionales sobre PI Centro de Conocimiento de la OMPI Informes de la OMPI sobre tendencias tecnológicas Índice Mundial de Innovación Informe mundial sobre la propiedad intelectual PCT - El sistema internacional de patentes ePCT Budapest - El Sistema internacional de depósito de microorganismos Madrid - El sistema internacional de marcas eMadrid Artículo 6ter (escudos de armas, banderas, emblemas de Estado) La Haya - Sistema internacional de diseños eHague Lisboa - Sistema internacional de indicaciones geográficas eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediación Arbitraje Determinación de expertos Disputas sobre nombres de dominio Acceso centralizado a la búsqueda y el examen (CASE) Servicio de acceso digital (DAS) WIPO Pay Cuenta corriente en la OMPI Asambleas de la OMPI Comités permanentes Calendario de reuniones Documentos oficiales de la OMPI Agenda para el Desarrollo Asistencia técnica Instituciones de formación en PI Apoyo para COVID-19 Estrategias nacionales de PI Asesoramiento sobre políticas y legislación Centro de cooperación Centros de apoyo a la tecnología y la innovación (CATI) Transferencia de tecnología Programa de Asistencia a los Inventores (PAI) WIPO GREEN PAT-INFORMED de la OMPI Consorcio de Libros Accesibles Consorcio de la OMPI para los Creadores WIPO ALERT Estados miembros Observadores Director general Actividades por unidad Oficinas en el exterior Ofertas de empleo Adquisiciones Resultados y presupuesto Información financiera Supervisión

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center

ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION

Bollore v. Mohammadali Mokhtari

Case No. DIR2018-0014

1. The Parties

The Complainant is Bollore of Ergue Gaberic, France, represented by Nameshield, France.

The Respondent is Mohammadali Mokhtari of Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.

2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name <bollore.ir> is registered with IRNIC.

3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the "Center") on July 12, 2018. On July 12, 2018, the Center transmitted by email to IRNIC a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On July 14, 2018, IRNIC transmitted by email to the Center its verification response confirming that the Respondent is listed as the registrant and providing the contact details. Hard copies of the Complaint were received by the Center on July 16, 2018.

The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy" or "irDRP"), the Rules for .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules"), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Supplemental Rules").

In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on July 23, 2018. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was August 12, 2018. On August 13, 2018, the Center notified the Respondent's default.

The Center appointed Clive Duncan Thorne as the sole panelist in this matter on August 24, 2018. 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

According to the Complainant, The Bollore Group is a French registered company founded in 1822. Its commercial activities now include strong activity in transportation and logistics, communication and media, and electricity storage and solutions. Further details are set out in Annex 2 to the Complaint which exhibits extracts from the Bollore website.

It is one of the 500 largest companies in the world. It is listed on the Paris Stock Exchange though a majority interest is held by the Bollore family. In addition to its trading activities the Complainant manages a number of financial assets including plantations and financial investments.

The Complainant owns several trade marks incorporating BOLLORE including International registration BOLLORE no.704697 (registered on December 11, 1998), a copy of which is exhibited at Annex 3 to the Complaint.

The Complainant owns various domain names including <bollore.com>.

The disputed domain name <bollore.ir> was registered on July 2, 2018, which is after the date of the Complainant's trade mark registration that it relies upon. It resolves to an inactive website details of which are set out in Annex 5 to the Complaint.

In the absence of a Response the Panel accepts the evidence adduced by the Complainant to be true and proceeds to determine the Complaint on the basis of that evidence

5. Parties' Contentions

A. Complainant

The Complainant submits:

1. The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to its trade mark BOLLORE.

2. The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name. There is no evidence to that effect.

3. The disputed domain name was registered with knowledge of the Complainant's prior rights and is being used in respect of an inactive website.

B. Respondent

The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant's contentions.

6. Discussion and Findings

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar

On the basis of the evidence of the Complainant's rights in the trade mark BOLLORE, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name incorporates the word "Bollore" in its entirety. As the Complainant points out; the addition of the country code Top-Level Domain (ccTLD) ".ir" does not prevent confusing similarity.

Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark i.e., BOLLORE in which the Complainant has rights.

B. Rights or Legitimate Interests

Once the Complainant has made a prima facie showing that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, the burden of production shifts to the Respondent. The Complainant submits that the Respondent under paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy has failed to show that he has rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.

On the evidence, the Respondent is Mohammadali Mokhtari (Annex 1 to the Complaint). There is no evidence that Mohammali Mokhtari is known as nor uses the name "Bollore". Indeed the Respondent's website is inactive. The Complainant also confirms that the Respondent is not affiliated with nor authorized by it to use the trade mark BOLLORE.

On the basis of this evidence the Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.

C. Registered or Used in Bad Faith

The Complainant's evidence at Annex 6 to the Complaint shows that the trade mark BOLLORE has a substantial and widespread reputation throughout the world. In the absence of a Response the Panel accepts this evidence.

The Complainant submits that given the international reputation of the trade mark the Respondent must have registered the disputed domain name with knowledge of the Complainant and its rights.

The Complainant also submits that this combined with an inactive website has been held to support a finding of bad faith. It also relies upon previous Panel decisions involving the Respondent set out in the Complaint.

In these circumstances, with no evidence to the contrary, the Panel finds that the Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.

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 <bollore.ir> be transferred to the Complainant.

Clive Duncan Thorne
Sole Panelist
Date: September 4, 2018