Viking Range Corporation, established under the laws of Mississippi, USA and located therein, moved to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Centre, with regard to its grievance in relation to its rights in the mark and name VIKING and VIKING COOKING SCHOOL, being the owner of the trademark VIKING and holder of registrations in respect of the same in the USA. The matter posing itself forth the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center Administrative Panel Decision as Viking Range Corporation v. Domains By Proxy [2008 (37) PTC 624 (WIPO)]
The first of these registrations dates back to 1987, while the domain name under contention gcookingschools.com was registered in 2005. The WHOIS database revealed that a proxy service had been put to use to get the domain name under contention registered. The use of a proxy service to obtain registration, an increasingly common practice prevents the name of the true registrant to be displayed. The Panelist noted that such a practice may have been adopted to maintain privacy and that several reputable proxy service providers exist. However, noting the existent potential for cyber squatters, the Panel opined that proxy service providers must divulge all details of original owners and that the domain name be frozen, while the proceedings remain pending. On the possibility of two parties acting as Respondent, the Panelist decided that the respondent would proceed in the name of the proxy service provider since the name of the beneficial owner was undisclosed by him.
Taking note of all the trade and service marks registered, the panel observed that the disputing domain name was similar to Viking' marks and domain name (www.vikingcookingschool.com). Viking asserted that confusion was bound to be caused in the minds of the consumers, as also on entering the website, they might be diverted to the web page gcookingschools.com registered by Domains By Proxy. They not having demonstrated or established any legitimate interest were stated by the Panelist to have been holding or "parking" the domain name. Viking stated that at the time of the registration of Domain By Proxy' domain name, they were aware of Viking' marks owing to substantial advertising and marketing of the name and the Marks. Domain By Proxy did not revert to any of these contentions, and it was observed that no legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the domain name was being made.
Deliberating upon the various contentions, the Panel noted that on seeing the disputed domain name, consumers were likely to be directed to the disputed domain name, and that the domain name registered by Domains by Proxy was identical or confusingly similar. To determine the rights and legitimate interests, Paragraph 4(c) of the Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy and giving due accord to the facts of the scenario, stated that a domain name should have been registered as also used in bad faith for a complaint to succeed. The panel noted, that a plethora of precedents were existent whereby the use of a disputed domain name to redirect Internet users to websites that host links to external websites was stated to evidence bad faith. The Panel concluded that the disputed website was in fact being used in bad faith. In the pursuance, the domain name was ordered to be transferred to Viking Range Corporation.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
