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

Guccio Gucci S.p.A. v. Xinjian Hu

Case No. D2014-1962

1. The Parties

The Complainant is Guccio Gucci S.p.A. of Florence, Italy, represented by Studio Barbero, Italy.

The Respondent is Xinjian Hu of Shangqiu, Henan, China.

2. The Domain Names and Registrar

The disputed domain names <abc-gucci2014.asia>, <ba-gucci2014.asia>, <dodo-gucci2014.asia>, <gucci-baba2014.asia>, <gucci-bebe2014.asia>, <gucci-cici2014.asia>, <gucci-dada2014.asia>, <gucci-fafa2014.asia>, <gucci-fifi2014.asia>, <gucci-gigi2014.asia>, <guccihello-hk-2014.asia>, <gucci-hihi2014.asia>, <gucci-kaka2014.asia>, <gucci-kiki2014.asia>, <gucci-lala2014.asia>, <gucci-mimi2014.asia>, <gucci-mingpaibao2014.asia>, <guccimulu2014.asia>, <gucci-nana2014.asia>, <gucci-nene2014.asia>, <gucci-oa2014.asia>, <gucci-opq2014.asia>, <gucci-papa2014.asia>, <gucci-pp2014.asia>, <gucci-qaqa2014.asia>, <gucci-qiqi2014.asia>, <gucci-roro2014.asia>, <gucci-sasa2014.asia>, <gucci-soso2014.asia>, <gucci-ss2014.asia>, <gucci-tata2014.asia>, <gucci-tiantian2014.asia>, <gucci-vava2014.asia>, <gucci-vivi2014.asia>, <gucci-wiwi2014.asia>, <gucci-xaxa2014.asia>, <gucci-xixi2014.asia>, <gucci-yaya2014.asia>, <gucci-zaza2014.asia>, <gucci-zozo2014.asia>, <gucci2014-hello.asia>, <gucci2014-ok.asia>, <gui-gucci2014.asia>, <haha-gucci2014.asia>, <hala-gucci2014.asia>, <hehe-gucci2014.asia>, <hi-gucci2014.asia>, <jj-gucci2014.asia>, <jojo-gucci2014.asia>, <joy-gucci2014.asia>, <los-gucci2014.asia>, <ml-gucci2014.asia>, <nan-gucci2014.asia>, <pei-gucci2014.asia>, <2014-gucci-baobao.asia>, <2014-gucci-guqi.asia>, <2014-guccihello.asia>, <2014gucci-t.asia>, <2014-gucci-2013.asia>, <2014-tw-gucci5566.asia> and <3721-gucci2014.asia> are registered with Shanghai Meicheng Technology Information Development Co., Ltd. (the "Registrar").

3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the "Center") on November 6, 2014. On November 6, 2014, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain names. On November 7, 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 November 10, 2014, the Center transmitted an email to the parties in both Chinese and English regarding the language of the proceeding. On November 11, 2014, the Complainant confirmed its request that English be the language of the proceeding. The Respondent did not comment on the language of the proceeding by the specified due date.

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, and the proceedings commenced on November 17, 2014. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5(a), the due date for Response was December 7, 2014. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent's default on December 10, 2014.

The Center appointed Douglas Clark as the sole panelist in this matter on December 19, 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.

4. Factual Background

The Complainant is a company incorporated in Italy producing and selling various luxury goods and high end fashion items. It is the owner of registrations around the world including in China for the trademark GUCCI.

The Respondent is an individual resident in China.

The disputed domain names were all registered between March 10, 2014 and March 12, 2014.

58 of the disputed domain names re-direct to websites selling apparently counterfeit Gucci products as well as products of other famous brands. The remaining 3 disputed domain names <gucci-fafa2014.asia>, <joy-gucci2014.asia> and <nan-gucci2014.asia> resolve to inactive websites.

5. Parties' Contentions

A. Complainant

The Complainant's contentions are set out below.

The Complainant submits that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark GUCCI. The disputed domain names incorporate the whole of the Complainant's GUCCI trademark. The fact that the disputed domain names include the non-distinctive elements "baobao", "guqi", "hello", "t", "tw", "abc", "ba", "dodo", "ok", "baba", "bebe", "cici", "dada", "fafa", "fifi", "gigi", "hk", "hihi", "kaka", "kiki", "lala", "mimi", "mingpaibao", "mulu", "nana", "nene", "oa", "opq", "papa", "pp", "qaqa", "qiqi", "roro", "sasa", "soso", "ss", "tata", "tiantian", "vava", "vivi", "wiwi", "xaxa", "xixi", "yaya", "zaza", "zozo", "gui", "haha", "hala", "hehe", "hi", "jj", "jojo", "joy", "los", "ml", "nan", "pei" and/or the numbers "5566", "3721", "2014" and "2013" does not affect the confusing similarity.

The Complainant further submits that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names. It is not commonly known by the disputed domain names. It has not received any consent or license from the Complainant to use the Complainant's trademark.

The Complainant submits that the disputed domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith with the intention of confusing Internet users as to some link between the disputed domain names and the Complainant.

B. Respondent

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

6. Discussion and Findings

Language of Proceedings

The language of the Registration Agreement is Chinese. Paragraph 11(a) of the Rules provides that:

"Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, or specified otherwise in the Registration Agreement, the language of the administrative proceeding shall be the language of the Registration Agreement, subject to the authority of the Panel to determine otherwise, having regard to the circumstances of the administrative proceeding".

The Complainant requested the language of the proceeding to be English on the grounds that all the disputed domain names are made up of letters in Ascii-Script, rather than Chinese, which could be pronounced phonetically in English and English is the most widely used language in international relations; that the Complainant could not gather any further information about the Respondent because the postal address provided by the Respondent in the WhoIs database appears to be clearly false and the Respondent never replied to the Complainant's cease and desist letter and the Complainant, based in Italy, has no knowledge of Chinese.

The Center made a preliminary determination to:

1) accept the Complaint as filed in English;

2) accept a Response in either English or Chinese;

3) appoint a Panel familiar with both languages mentioned above, if available.

The final determination of the language of the proceeding lies with this Panel.

This Panel decided in Zappos.com, Inc. v. Zufu aka Huahaotrade, WIPO Case No. D2008-1191, that a respondent's failure to respond to a preliminary determination by the Center as to the language of the proceeding "should, in general, be a strong factor to allow the Panel to decide to proceed in favour of the language of the Complaint."

Further, as set out below, the Panel considers the merits of the case to be strongly in favour of the Complainant. Translating the Complaint would cause unnecessary delay in this matter. In this case, the Respondent has registered numerous domain names incorporating the Complainant's trademark under the same ".asia" generic Top-Level Domain (gTLD).

These factors lead the Panel to determine to follow the Center's preliminary determination. As the only pleading before the Panel is in English, the Panel will render its decision in English.

Substantive decision

The Panel finds that this is a clear case of domain name hijacking that the UDRP was designed to stop. The Panel agrees fully with the Complainant's arguments and accordingly does not consider it necessary to write a long decision.

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar

The disputed domain names are made up of the Complainant's registered trademark GUCCI, and the gTLD ".asia". The additional words, letters or numbers added to each of the disputed domain names do not take away the confusing similarity with the Complainant's registered trademark GUCCI.

The Panel finds the disputed domain names are confusingly similar the to the Complainant's registered trademark.

The first element of the Policy is made out.

B. Rights or Legitimate Interests

The Complainant has made a prima facie case that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the dispute domain names. The Respondent has not responded to the Complaint to assert any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names. None of the circumstances in paragraph 4(c) of the Policy, which sets out how a respondent can prove its rights or legitimate interests, are present in this case.

The Panel finds that the second element of the Policy is made out.

C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith

The Panel has no hesitation in finding that the disputed domain names were registered in bad faith and are being used in bad faith.

Paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy provides that a registrant has registered and is using a domain name in bad faith where:

"by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location."

This applies to the 58 disputed domain names that are resolving to webpages selling apparently counterfeit Gucci products. The disputed domain names are being used to attract Internet users for commercial gain.

For the three disputed domain names which do not resolve to active websites, given the registration by the Respondent of 58 other domain names containing the trademark GUCCI and which are being used for commercial gain, the Panel has no hesitation in finding that they have been registered with the intent to create confusion that a website under the domain names are in some way related to the Complainant. (See paragraph 3.2 of the WIPO Overivew of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Second Edition ("WIPO Overview 2.0"))

The Panel finds that the third element of the Policy is made out.

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 names <abc-gucci2014.asia>, <ba-gucci2014.asia>, <dodo-gucci2014.asia>, <gucci-baba2014.asia>, <gucci-bebe2014.asia>, <gucci-cici2014.asia>, <gucci-dada2014.asia>, <gucci-fafa2014.asia>, <gucci-fifi2014.asia>, <gucci-gigi2014.asia>, <guccihello-hk-2014.asia>, <gucci-hihi2014.asia>, <gucci-kaka2014.asia>, <gucci-kiki2014.asia>, <gucci-lala2014.asia>, <gucci-mimi2014.asia>, <gucci-mingpaibao2014.asia>, <guccimulu2014.asia>, <gucci-nana2014.asia>, <gucci-nene2014.asia>, <gucci-oa2014.asia>, <gucci-opq2014.asia>, <gucci-papa2014.asia>, <gucci-pp2014.asia>, <gucci-qaqa2014.asia>, <gucci-qiqi2014.asia>, <gucci-roro2014.asia>, <gucci-sasa2014.asia>, <gucci-soso2014.asia>, <gucci-ss2014.asia>, <gucci-tata2014.asia>, <gucci-tiantian2014.asia>, <gucci-vava2014.asia>, <gucci-vivi2014.asia>, <gucci-wiwi2014.asia>, <gucci-xaxa2014.asia>, <gucci-xixi2014.asia>, <gucci-yaya2014.asia>, <gucci-zaza2014.asia>, <gucci-zozo2014.asia>, <gucci2014-hello.asia>, <gucci2014-ok.asia>, <gui-gucci2014.asia>, <haha-gucci2014.asia>, <hala-gucci2014.asia>, <hehe-gucci2014.asia>, <hi-gucci2014.asia>, <jj-gucci2014.asia>, <jojo-gucci2014.asia>, <joy-gucci2014.asia>, <los-gucci2014.asia>, <ml-gucci2014.asia>, <nan-gucci2014.asia>, <pei-gucci2014.asia>, <2014-gucci-baobao.asia>, <2014-gucci-guqi.asia>, <2014-guccihello.asia>, <2014gucci-t.asia>, <2014-gucci-2013.asia>, <2014-tw-gucci5566.asia> and <3721-gucci2014.asia> be transferred to the Complainant.

Douglas Clark
Sole Panelist
Date: December 30, 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/