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

Alternative Dispute Resolution Proceeding

Case No. DSE2018-0050

1. Petitioner

The Petitioner is MT Secure Trade Limited of Malta, represented by Brimondo AB, Sweden.

2. Domain Holder

The Domain Holder is P. E. of Sweden.

3. Domain Name and Procedural History

This Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding relates to the domain name <betspin.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 WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (“the Center”) 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 August 31, 2018. The Domain Holder did not submit any response and, accordingly, the Center notified the Domain Holder's default on October 1, 2018.

The Center appointed Henry Olsson as the sole Arbitrator in this matter on October 17, 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. Factual Background

The Petitioner is a company registered in Malta. It is an affiliated company of Gaming Innovation Group P.L.C. which has offices in Malta and in other places in Europe. It has more than 700 employees and is a leading supplier in the gaming industry offering a variety of games, etc. under its online brands, among them “Betspin”. The Petitioner is the holder of two European Union trademarks, namely BETSPIN and BETSPIN figurative, with registration date April 1, 2015. These two marks have been used on the website “www.betspin.com” and other Top-Level Domains (TLDs) and country code Top-Level Domains (ccTLDs) as from 2015.

The domain name was registered on February 8, 2018, and does not resolve to an active website.

5. Claim

The Petitioner claims that the domain name shall be transferred to the Petitioner.

The Domain Holder has not responded to the claim.

6. Parties’ Contentions

A. Petitioner

The Petitioner submits that the domain name is identical or at least similar to the two registered European Union trademarks; the domain name includes the trademarks with the addition of “.se” which addition lacks distinctiveness and is not sufficient to give the domain name an individual meaning.

The Petitioner notes that the domain name at issue was registered on February 8, 2018, which is around three years after the registration of the trademarks. According to the Petitioner the Domain Holder knew or should have known the BETSPIN brand which is distinctive and well-known in the online gaming industry. The Petitioner submits that BETSPIN is so closely linked and associated with the Petitioner that the Domain Holder’s use of the mark strongly implies bad faith; at the time of the registration of the domain name the Domain Holder knew, or at least should have known, the existence of the Petitioner’s trademarks.

The Petitioner states that the domain name at issue is linked to an inactive site; the Petitioner submits in this respect that passively holding a domain name may constitute a factor in finding bad faith use.

The Petitioner submits that at least until May 14, 2018, the Domain Holder offered the domain name for sale to the general public at a price of not less than SEK 5,000. The Petitioner notes that the notion “general public” includes also the Petitioner and competitors to the Petitioner.

Furthermore, the Petitioner notes that as of January 1, 2019, the Petitioner will be licensed to channel all Swedish traffic for gaming services through a “.se” domain name. Consequently, the Domain Holder is preventing the Petitioner from using its trademark in a domain name together under the ccTLD “.se”

The Petitioner sent the Domain Holder a cease and desist letter, dated May 28, 2018, to which the Domain Holder never replied.

The Domain Holder has, according to the Petitioner, no rights or justified interest in the domain name at issue. The Petitioner has no relationship with the Domain Holder. There is no evidence that the Domain Holder owns any trademark that reflects the domain name or even the term “betspin”. There is no evidence that the Domain Holder has used the domain name in connection with any bona fide offering of goods or services on the webpage connected to the domain name, which is inactive. Furthermore, the Domain Holder is not commonly known by “betspin.se” or any other use of the term “betspin”.

B. Domain Holder

As mentioned above, the Domain Holder has not submitted any response to the Petitioner’s claim.

7. Discussion and Findings

According to Paragraph 7.2 of the se. Policy a domain name may be deregistered or transferred to the Petitioner if the following three conditions are fulfilled:

1. The Domain Name is identical or similar to a name, including a trade symbol or to certain other intellectual property protected subject matter, which is legally recognized in Sweden and to which the party requesting dispute resolution can prove its rights,

2. The Domain Name has been registered or used in bad faith, and

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

A. Identity or confusing similarity

The Petitioner is the holder of two European Union trademarks, the word mark BETSPIN and the figurative mark containing the same word. The registration of these trademarks has legal effect in Sweden. The domain name includes the trademark with the addition of the ccTLD “.se”.

These circumstances constitute a similarity between the protected trademarks and the domain name in the sense of Paragraph 7.2 of the .se Policy.

B. Registration or use in bad faith

As mentioned above, the Domain Holder has not submitted any response to the Petitioner’s claim. The Arbitrator will therefore build his conclusions on the contentions of the Petitioner supported by the written evidence submitted.

In this context the Arbitrator notes that the domain name at issue was registered on February 8, 2018, which is around three years after the Petitioner’s trademarks were registered. The Petitioner has submitted that it had been using the trademarks – which are particularly distinctive ones - and the website “www.betspin.com” as of 2015. The domain name is used for a site which is inactive, and the Domain Holder has been offering the domain name for sale to the public at least as late as on May 14, 2018. The Petitioner sent a cease and desist letter to which the Domain Holder, according to the Petitioner, never replied. Furthermore, the Petitioner has submitted that it will, as from January 1, 2019, be licensed to channel all Swedish traffic for gaming services through a “.se” domain name; the actions of the Domain Holder prevents the Petitioner from using its trademark in a domain name under the ccTLD “.se”.

An assessment of these circumstances leads to the conclusion that the domain name has been registered and used in bad faith in the sense of Paragraph 7.2 of the .se Policy.

C. Rights or justified interest

The circumstances submitted by the Petitioner which have not been contradicted by the Domain Holder lead to the conclusion that the Domain Holder has no rights or justified interest in the domain name in the sense of the .se Policy.

8. Decision

The Arbitrator directs that the domain name <betspin.se> shall be transferred to the Petitioner MT Secure Trade Limited.

9. Summary

The domain name is similar to the two trademarks containing the word “betspin” to which the Petitioner has rights in Sweden. In respect of the bad faith, the Domain Holder has submitted a number of circumstances, for instance that the Petitioner used the trademarks and the website “www.betspin.com” since 2015, that the registration of the disputed domain name took place around three years after the registration of the trademarks, that the Domain Holder has linked the domain name to an inactive site and that he offered it for sale to the public. The Domain Holder has not responded to the Petitioner’s contentions. The circumstances brought forward by the Petitioner, which are supported by written evidence, lead to the conclusion that the Domain Holder has both registered the domain name and used it in bad faith. Furthermore, the Domain Holder has no rights or justified interest in the domain name. In consequence thereof, the Petitioner’s claim for transfer of the domain name to the Petitioner was granted.

Henry Olsson
Date: October 29, 2018

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/