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

KWM Brands Pte Limited and King & Wood Mallesons v. Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC / Name Redacted

Case No. D2015-1452

1. The Parties

The Complainants are KWM Brands Pte Limited of Singapore, Singapore and King & Wood Mallesons of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, represented internally.

The Respondent is Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC of Scottsdale, Arizona, United States of America ("United States") / Name Redacted of New York, New York, United States.

2. The Domain Name and Registrar

The disputed domain name, <au-kwm.com> (the "Domain Name"), is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the "Registrar").

3. Procedural History

The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the "Center") on August 18, 2015. On August 18, 2015, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the Domain Name. On August 19, 2015, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the Domain Name, which differed from the named Respondent and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to the Complainant on August 19, 2015 providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting the Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. The Complainant filed an amendment to the Complaint on August 21, 2015.

The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to 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 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondents of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on August 27, 2015. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was September 16, 2015. The Respondents did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondents' default on September 17, 2015.

The Center appointed Tony Willoughby as the sole panelist in this matter on September 25, 2015. 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.

The Complainant, KWM Brands Pte Limited is the registered proprietor of the KWM trade mark upon which the Complainants rely in this case. The Complainant, King & Wood Mallesons, an Australian partnership, uses that trade mark with the consent of and under licence from KWM Brands Pte Limited. The Panel accepts that it is appropriate (in the circumstances of this case) that the Complainants have a common grievance against the Respondent(s), that this is essentially a single complaint and that the Complainants should be treated as one for this purpose. Accordingly, all references hereinafter to the "Complainants" are references to either or both of them as the context requires.

As will be seen below, the Panel is satisfied that the beneficial owner of the Domain Name, who used a privacy service and false contact details to conceal his identity, intentionally registered the Domain Name in the name of a partner of King & Wood Mallesons in an attempt to defraud that individual. Neither the privacy service nor the King & Wood Mallesons partner in question had any part to play in the registration of the Domain Name or its subsequent use. The Panel proposes to treat as the sole Respondent in this case the beneficial owner of the Domain Name, the underlying registrant, whose name and address (albeit a false name and address) have been disclosed by the Registrar as being the name and address appearing on the Registrar's WhoIs database. As is customary where the name of an innocent individual has been adopted for the purpose of impersonating that individual (see for example, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG v. Name Redacted, WIPO Case No. D2012-0890), the Panel has requested that that individual's name be redacted from the record of this proceeding. The Panel requests the Registrar to execute the transfer of the Domain Name in accordance with the direction in section 7 below and accepting that "Name Redacted" in this decision refers to the name of the individual with an address in New York specified as the registrant in the Registrar's response to the Center's verification request and referred to hereinafter as the "Respondent". Attached as Annex 1 to this Decision is an instruction to the Registrar regarding transfer of the disputed domain name that includes the name of the referenced individual, and the Panel has authorized the Center to transmit Annex 1 to the Registrar as part of the order in this proceeding. However, the Panel directs the Center, pursuant to paragraph 4(j) of the Policy and paragraph 16(b) of the Rules, that Annex 1 to this Decision shall not be published based on exceptional circumstances. See Banco Bradesco S.A. v. FAST-12785241 Attn. Bradescourgente.net / Name Redacted, WIPO Case No. D2009-1788.

4. Factual Background

The Complainants are/include a national law firm of repute in Australia. The Complainants are the registered proprietors of inter alia Australian Trade Mark Registration No. 1465547 KWM (word) dated December 15, 2011 (registered January 14, 2013) for a wide variety of goods and services in classes 9, 13, 35, 36, 38, 41, 42, and 45.

The Domain Name was registered on July 8, 2015 and was used that same month in an attempt to defraud one of the Complainants' partners. For that purpose the Domain Name was registered in the name of the partner concerned and for the reasons set out in section 3 above his name has been redacted from the record of this proceeding. The matter has been reported to the police by the Complainants. The Panel has been informed, and accepts, that it will not be helpful to relate the detail of the attempted fraud in this decision.

5. Parties' Contentions

A. Complainants

The Complainants contend that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainants' KWM registered trade mark, that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name and that the Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith.

B. Respondent

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

6. Discussion and Findings

A. General

According to paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, for this Complaint to succeed in relation to the Domain Name, the Complainants must prove each of the following, namely that:

(i) The Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainants have rights; and

(ii) The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name; and

(iii) The Domain Name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.

B. Identical or Confusingly Similar

The Domain Name comprises (i) "au", a familiar abbreviation for Australia, (ii) a hyphen, (iii) the Complainants' trade mark and (iv) the generic ".com" top level domain identifier. The Domain Name features a reproduction of the Complainants' trade mark, none of the additional material in any way detracting from the distinctiveness of the Complainants' trade mark.

The Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainants have rights.

C. Rights or Legitimate Interests

As will have been seen in sections 3 and 4 above the Panel is satisfied that the Respondent, using a false name and address, registered the Domain Name in an attempt to impersonate one of the partners of the Complainants and with the intention of defrauding that individual.

Self-evidently, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name.

D. Registered and Used in Bad Faith

On the same basis the Panel finds that the Respondent registered and is using the Domain Name in bad faith within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy.

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 Domain Name, <au-kwm.com>, be transferred to the Complainant, King & Wood Mallesons.

Tony Willoughby
Sole Panelist
Date: October 3, 2015

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/