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

Alternative Dispute Resolution Proceeding

Accelerated Proceeding

Case No. DSE2018-0039

1. Petitioner

The Petitioner is Zipcar, Inc., United States of America, represented by Bryn Aarflot AS, Norway.

2. Domain Holder

The Domain Holder is R. H. I., KIRAKUNA AS, Norway.

3. Domain Name and Procedural History

This Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding relates to the Domain Name <zipcar.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 Petitioner elects to have the dispute decided by one arbitrator and to have the dispute decided as an Accelerated Proceeding if the Domain Holder does not respond to the Petition.

The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Centerˮ) 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 July 9, 2018. The Domain Holder did not submit any response and, accordingly, the Center notified the Domain Holder’s default on August 9, 2018.

The Center appointed Jon Dal as the sole Arbitrator in this matter on August 16, 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. Claim

The Petitioner claims that the Domain Name shall be transferred to the Petitioner.

The Domain Holder did not submit any response.

5. Parties’ Contentions

A. Petitioner

A1. The Domain Name is identical or similar to a name which is legally binding in Sweden and to which the Petitioner can prove its rights

The Petitioner owns Swedish trademark registration no. 412074 for the word mark ZIPCAR in class 39 and European Union Trade Mark reg. no. 003139375 for the word mark ZIPCAR in class 9 and 42. Both registrations are validly registered and hence legally binding in Sweden, and were similarly registered and valid at the time of the Domain Name registration. The trademark is incorporated in the Domain Name in its entirety and without any distinguishing elements, and hence the Domain Name is identical to a trademark in which the Petitioner has valid rights.

A2. The Domain Name has been registered or used in bad faith

The Petitioner is a subsidiary of Avis Budget Group, Inc., which is a leading global provider of mobility solutions, both through its Avis and Budget brands, which have more than 11,000 rental locations in approximately 180 countries around the world, and through its Zipcar brand, which is the world’s leading car sharing network, with more than one million members. Avis Budget Group operates most of its car rental offices in North America, Europe and Australasia directly, and operates primarily through licensees in other parts of the world. The Petitioner owns and operates the domain name <zipcar.com>, which is used as a portal for the Petitioner’s car sharing network, and has exclusively and extensively used and promoted its brand to the extent that Zipcar, Inc. has become the world’s leading car sharing network, which shows that the mark has obtained a strong reputation.

The Petitioner owns a number of trademarks for its ZIPCAR mark throughout the world.

The Domain Name is used for what appears as false third-party advertisements apparently completely
non-related to the Domain Holder or its business. Given the Petitioner’s position as the world’s leading car sharing network, and being part of the well-known Avis Budget Group, as well as the Petitioner’s extensive and exclusive use of the ZIPCAR mark which has resulted in a strong reputation, it is unlikely that the Domain Holder was not aware of the Petitioner’s earlier rights in the name. A simple Internet search or a search in the Swedish, Norwegian or European Union (EU) trademark databases would have been sufficient for the Domain Holder to establish that the Petitioner had rights in the “Zipcar” name.

The use of the Domain Name for advertisements which are non-related to the Domain Holder’s business activities shows that the Domain Name was registered and is being used for the purpose of profit. The Petitioner thus holds that the registration and the use of <zipcar.se> are in bad faith.

A3. The Domain Holder has no rights or justified interest in the Domain Name

The Domain Holder is a Norwegian company, which offers personalized IT services to companies. According to the Domain Holder’s website they help companies with personal consultancy with regard to infrastructure, licenses and hardware. The Domain Holder’s website has no indication of the Domain Holder’s use of, or demonstrable preparations to use, of “Zipcar” in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services. The Domain Holder is not known as “Zipcar” and the Petitioner has not provided its permission or authorization to any such use of the ZIPCAR mark in any way. Accordingly, the Domain Holder has no right or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name.

A4. Evidence

The Petitioner invokes as evidence, i.a., printouts for Swedish and EU trademark registrations for ZIPCAR, printouts from the Domain Holder’s website and printouts of advertisements from “www.zipcar.se”.

B. Domain Holder

The Domain Holder did not submit any response.

6. Discussion and Findings

A domain name may be transferred to the party requesting dispute resolution proceedings if the following three conditions are fulfilled:

A. The domain name is identical or similar to a name which is legally binding in Sweden and to which the party requesting dispute resolution can prove its rights, and

B. The domain name has been registered or used in bad faith, and

C. The domain holder has no rights or justified interest in the domain name.

All three conditions must be met in order for the party requesting dispute resolution to succeed with a claim for transfer of the domain name.

A. The Domain Name is identical or similar to a name which is legally binding in Sweden and to which the Petitioner can prove its rights

The Petitioner is the owner of a Swedish trademark registration for ZIPCAR (word mark) and an EU trademark registration for ZIPCAR (word mark). The Domain Name is in all material aspects identical to the Petitioner’s trademarks.

B. The Domain Name has been registered or used in bad faith

Based on the record, the Arbitrator finds the Domain Name has been registered and used in bad faith.

C. The Domain Holder has no rights or justified interest in the Domain Name.

Based on the record, the Arbitrator finds the Domain Holder has no rights or justified interests in the Domain Name.

7. Decision

The Domain Name <zipcar.se> shall be transferred to the Petitioner.

Jon Dal
Date: August 21, 2018