À propos de la propriété intellectuelle Formation en propriété intellectuelle Sensibilisation à la propriété intellectuelle La propriété intellectuelle pour… Propriété intellectuelle et… Propriété intellectuelle et… Information relative aux brevets et à la technologie Information en matière de marques Information en matière de dessins et modèles industriels Information en matière d’indications géographiques Information en matière de protection des obtentions végétales (UPOV) Lois, traités et jugements dans le domaine de la propriété intellectuelle Ressources relatives à la propriété intellectuelle Rapports sur la propriété intellectuelle Protection des brevets Protection des marques Protection des dessins et modèles industriels Protection des indications géographiques Protection des obtentions végétales (UPOV) Règlement extrajudiciaire des litiges Solutions opérationnelles à l’intention des offices de propriété intellectuelle Paiement de services de propriété intellectuelle Décisions et négociations Coopération en matière de développement Appui à l’innovation Partenariats public-privé L’Organisation Travailler avec nous Responsabilité Brevets Marques Dessins et modèles industriels Indications géographiques Droit d’auteur Secrets d’affaires Académie de l’OMPI Ateliers et séminaires Journée mondiale de la propriété intellectuelle Magazine de l’OMPI Sensibilisation Études de cas et exemples de réussite Actualités dans le domaine de la propriété intellectuelle Prix de l’OMPI Entreprises Universités Peuples autochtones Instances judiciaires Ressources génétiques, savoirs traditionnels et expressions culturelles traditionnelles Économie Égalité des genres Santé mondiale Changement climatique Politique en matière de concurrence Objectifs de développement durable Application Technologies de pointe Applications mobiles Sport Tourisme PATENTSCOPE Analyse de brevets Classification internationale des brevets Programme ARDI – Recherche pour l’innovation Programme ASPI – Information spécialisée en matière de brevets Base de données mondiale sur les marques Madrid Monitor Base de données Article 6ter Express Classification de Nice Classification de Vienne Base de données mondiale sur les dessins et modèles Bulletin des dessins et modèles internationaux Base de données Hague Express Classification de Locarno Base de données Lisbon Express Base de données mondiale sur les marques relative aux indications géographiques Base de données PLUTO sur les variétés végétales Base de données GENIE Traités administrés par l’OMPI WIPO Lex – lois, traités et jugements en matière de propriété intellectuelle Normes de l’OMPI Statistiques de propriété intellectuelle WIPO Pearl (Terminologie) Publications de l’OMPI Profils nationaux Centre de connaissances de l’OMPI Série de rapports de l’OMPI consacrés aux tendances technologiques Indice mondial de l’innovation Rapport sur la propriété intellectuelle dans le monde PCT – Le système international des brevets ePCT Budapest – Le système international de dépôt des micro-organismes Madrid – Le système international des marques eMadrid Article 6ter (armoiries, drapeaux, emblèmes nationaux) La Haye – Le système international des dessins et modèles industriels eHague Lisbonne – Le système d’enregistrement international des indications géographiques eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Médiation Arbitrage Procédure d’expertise Litiges relatifs aux noms de domaine Accès centralisé aux résultats de la recherche et de l’examen (WIPO CASE) Service d’accès numérique aux documents de priorité (DAS) WIPO Pay Compte courant auprès de l’OMPI Assemblées de l’OMPI Comités permanents Calendrier des réunions Documents officiels de l’OMPI Plan d’action de l’OMPI pour le développement Assistance technique Institutions de formation en matière de propriété intellectuelle Mesures d’appui concernant la COVID-19 Stratégies nationales de propriété intellectuelle Assistance en matière d’élaboration des politiques et de formulation de la législation Pôle de coopération Centres d’appui à la technologie et à l’innovation (CATI) Transfert de technologie Programme d’aide aux inventeurs WIPO GREEN Initiative PAT-INFORMED de l’OMPI Consortium pour des livres accessibles L’OMPI pour les créateurs WIPO ALERT États membres Observateurs Directeur général Activités par unité administrative Bureaux extérieurs Avis de vacance d’emploi Achats Résultats et budget Rapports financiers Audit et supervision

WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center

ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION

Fédération Internationale des Logis v. Jeong Hae Yong

Case No. D2014-1297

1. The Parties

The Complainant is Fédération Internationale des Logis of Paris, France, represented by Cabinet Germain & Maureau, France.

The Respondent is Jeong Hae Yong of Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea.

2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name <logis-hotel.com> is registered with Megazone Corp., dba HOSTING.KR (the "Registrar").

3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the "Center") on July 29, 2014. On July 29, 2014, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On August 1, 2014, 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.

On August 1, 2014, the Center notified the Parties in both English and Korean that the language of the Registration Agreement for the disputed domain name was Korean. On the same day, the Complainant requested for English to be the language of the proceeding, to which the Respondent has not replied.

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(a) and 4(a), the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint in both English and Korean, and the proceedings commenced on August 7, 2014.

In response to an email communication from the Respondent of August 7, 2014, the Complainant requested a suspension of the administrative proceedings for 30 days in order to explore a settlement on August 8, 2014. The Center notified the Parties of the suspension of the proceedings on August 8, 2014. On September 17, 2014 the Complainant requested re-institution of the proceedings. On the same day, the proceedings were re-instituted and the new date for the Response was set for October 6, 2014, in accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a).

The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent's default on October 7, 2014.

The Center appointed Ik-Hyun Seo as the sole panelist in this matter on October 14, 2014. 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.

Based on the deadline set forth in the Rules paragraph 15, a decision was to be issued by the Panel no later than October 28, 2014. However, due to exceptional circumstances experienced by the Panel, the Panel extended the deadline to November 11, 2014.

4. Factual Background

The Complainant, Fédération Internationale Des Logis, is a French non-profit organization which operates a hotel chain by the name of "Logis". Founded in 1949, the Complainant now has around 2,600 hotels across Europe, namely in France, Italy, Germany, Luxembourg, Belgium, Spain and the Netherlands. The Complainant has owned trademark registrations to the LOGIS mark since 2007 (Community Trade Mark Nos. 6467872 and 6467773).

The Respondent appears to be a Korean individual with an address in the Republic of Korea.

The disputed domain name was registered on March 31, 2012.

5. Parties' Contentions

A. Complainant

The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the mark LOGIS in which the Complainant has rights. Specifically, the disputed domain name is composed of the term "logis" in which the Complainant has trademark registrations and the term "hotel" which lacks distinctiveness since it merely describes the Complainant's business. Further, the Complainant states that the disputed domain name is essentially identical to the Complainant's registered domain name <logishotels.com> through which the Complainant operates its official website and offers hotel related products and services. The Complainant also alleges that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, and that it registered and uses the disputed domain name in bad faith.

B. Respondent

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

6. Discussion and Findings

A. Language of the Proceeding

Paragraph 11(a) of the Rules provides that the language of the proceeding shall be the language of the Registration Agreement, unless otherwise agreed by the parties, subject to the authority of the panel to determine otherwise. In this case, the language of the Registration Agreement is Korean, and both parties have had an opportunity to argue their position on this point. The Center issued a notice stating that it would accept the Complaint filed in English, and that the Response would be accepted in either Korean or English. The Respondent subsequently chose not to file a formal Response.

First, the Complainant is based in France and the Respondent appears to be based in the Republic of Korea. Accordingly, English would appear to be the fairest neutral language for rendering this decision. Besides, the Respondent did not raise any objection to the Complaint filed in English, and the content displayed by the disputed domain name was partly in English in the past, and now entirely in English.

Under these circumstances, the Panel finds it proper and fair to render the Decision in English.

B. Identical or Confusingly Similar

The Complainant owns trademark registrations for the LOGIS mark and has used this mark in Europe for the last 65 years. The disputed domain name begins with and includes "logis" which is identical to the Complainant's trademark. Further, the only other term in the disputed domain name, "hotel", is simply a generic term. Therefore, the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to trademarks owned by the Complainant.

For the reasons mentioned above, the Panel finds that the first element has been established.

C. Rights or Legitimate Interests

On the basis of the present record, the Panel finds that the Complainant has made the required allegations to support a prima facie showing that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. Once such a prima facie basis has been established, the Respondent carries the burden of demonstrating its rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. However, the Respondent in this case has chosen to file no Response to these assertions by the Complainant, and there is no evidence or allegation in the record that would warrant a finding in favor of the Respondent on this point.

For the reasons provided above, the Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, and that the second element has been established.

D. Registered and Used in Bad Faith

The Panel finds that there are more than sufficient reasons to find bad faith in the registration and use of the disputed domain name in this case. First, aside from using a hyphen and singularizing the term "hotels", the disputed domain name is identical to the domain name of the Complainant's official website. Further, the Respondent has linked the disputed domain name with a parking service providing keywords and advertising links for hotels and lodging services, which is exactly the business of the Complainant. Based on the circumstances, no reasonable conclusion can be reached other than that the Respondent intentionally registered and is using the disputed domain name for the purpose of financially benefiting from visitors that reach the disputed domain name by mistake.

For the reasons given above, the Panel finds that it is clear that this third and final element has been established.

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 <logis-hotel.com> be transferred to the Complainant.

Ik-Hyun Seo
Sole Panelist
Date: November 11, 2014

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