|
1. Parties and Contested Domain Name
Chemstations Inc., 2901 Wilcrest, Ste 305, Houston, Texas is a Chemical engineering software developer.
The Registrant is Batchcad Limited, 2a Tannners Yard, Giles Gates, Hexham, Northumberland, United Kingdom.
The contested domain name is chemstations.com
2. Procedural History
The electronic version of the Complaint form was filed on-line through eResolution's Website on May 18, 2000. The hardcopy of the
Complaint Form was received on May 24, 2000. Payment was received on May 24, 2000.
Upon receiving all the required information, eResolution's clerk proceeded to:
- Confirm the identity of the Registrar for the contested Domain Name;
- Verify the Registrar's Whois Database and confirm all the required contact information for Respondent;
- Verify if the contested Domain Name resolved to an active Web page;
- Verify if the Complaint was administratively compliant.
The inquiry leads the Clerk's Office of eResolution to the following conclusions: the Registrar is Network Solutions, Inc., the Whois
database contains all the required contact information, the contested Domain Name resolves to an active Web page and the Complaint
is administratively compliant.
An email was sent to the Registrar by eResolution Clerk's Office to obtain a copy of the Registration Agreement on May 19, 2000.
The requested information was received on May 29, 2000.
The Clerk's Office then proceeded to send a copy of the Complaint Form and the required Cover Sheet in accordance with paragraph
2 (a) of the ICANN's Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy.
The Clerk's Office fulfilled all its responsibilities under Paragraph 2(a) in connection with forwarding the Complaint to the Respondent
on May 29, 2000. That date is the commencement date of the administrative proceeding.
On May 29, 2000, the Clerk's Office notified the Complainant, the Respondent, the concerned Registrar, and ICANN of the date of commencement
of the administrative proceeding.
On May 29, 2000, all attempts to communicate Official Notification of Commencement of Administrative Proceedings to the Respondent
by fax failed.
On May 30, 2000, Mr. Allen R. Wright (Registrant's Other Contact or Representative) replied to Clerk Office's email of May 29, 2000
by requesting that the two annexed documents (Commencement of Administrative Proceedings and Complaint Form) be resent to him. This
request was done by email via Ms. Victoria Bramfitt's address (Victoria.bramfitt@dial.pipex.com).
On May 30, 2000, the Clerk's Office resent the Official Notification of Commencement of Administrative Proceedings, along with the
two (2) aforementioned annexed documents, by email to Mr. Allen Wright at allen.wright@batchcad.com. An additional email was sent
on this same date confirming that the attached documents were included in the previous email. This message was sent to Ms. Victoria
Bramfitt and copied to Mr. Allen Wright.
On June 20, 2000, the Respondent had not yet submitted a response.
On June 21, 2000, the Clerk's Office contacted a first panelist, and requested that he acts as panelist in this case. On June 23,
2000, he declined.
On June 23, 2000, the Clerk's Office contacted Mr. Bruno Grégoire Sainte-Marie, and requested that he acts as panelist in this case.
On June 26, 2000, Mr. Bruno Grégoire Sainte-Marie, accepted to act as panelist in this case and filed the necessary Declaration of
Independence and Impartiality.
On the same day, the Clerk's Office forwarded a user name and a password to Mr. Bruno Grégoire Sainte-Marie, allowing him to access
the Complaint Form, the Response Form, and the evidence through eResolution's Automated Docket Management System.
On June 26, 2000, the parties were notified that Mr. Bruno Grégoire Sainte-Marie had been appointed and that a decision was to be,
save exceptional circumstances, handed down on July 10, 2000.
3. Factual Background
Chemstations Inc. is a Chemical engineering software developer. It operates under the trade-name "CHEMSTATIONS", but does not claim
to hold any trademark relating to that name.
Chemstations Inc. commercializes different software, such as Chemcad, CC-Batch, CC-therm, CC-Reacs and CC-Dynamic Column.
The Registrant, Batchcad Ltd. is in the same business as Chemstations Inc., and is a competitor thereof.
The Registrant has not submitted any Response in the present proceedings.
4. Parties' Contentions
The Complainant states that the domain name in question www.chemstations.com is identical to its company name and its web-site name,
which can be found at .
The Complainant emphasizes the fact that the Registrant has no other use for the domain name than to hold the web-site, and that
Batchcad Ltd. has "no products or services called Chemstations or anything like it. They are affiliated with no organizations of
the name Chemstations".
The complainant further submits that Batchcad Ltd. made no prior use of the name "Chemstations" before setting up the web-site.
Indeed, Chemstations, Inc. and Batchcad, Ltd. are competitors and the web-site homepage: states: "IMPORTANT NOTICE BatchCAD is the most powerful, reliable and widely used simulator for batch process development. Chemstations
Inc. of Houston Texas no longer supply this product. For a full list of BatchCAD agents world wide and latest developments in dynamic
batch simulation, please visit the BatchCAD web site."
Chemstations, Inc. charges that Batchcad, Ltd. has registered the domain name www.chemstations.com strictly in order to keep Chemstations,
Inc., a competitor, from using its name as a domain name.
According to Chemstations, Inc., Batchcad, Ltd. "deliberately and spitefully pre-empted" the contested domain name, due to the acrimonious
relationship at the time of discontinuing our business relationship.
Finally, Chemstations, Inc. charges that Batchcad, Ltd. has deliberately pre-empted the name www.chemstations.com in order to divert
interested prospects in its products towards their competing products.
The Respondent has not submitted his answer.
5. Discussion and Findings
Complainant has the burden under section 4 of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) of showing (A/) that the Respondent's
domain name is identical to or confusingly similar to its trademark or service mark, (B/) that Respondent has no rights or legitimate
interests in the domain name, and (C/) that Respondent has both registered and used the domain name in bad faith.
A. Similarity of domain name to mark
The domain name chemstations.com appears to be identical to the company name of the Complainant.
However the issue which was first considered by the Panel was whether the Complainant had substantiated its trademark rights to the
name "CHEMSTATIONS".
The Complainant does not claim it owns any Registration related to the name "CHEMSTATIONS".
Nevertheless, Chemstations Inc. has proven that it was operating under the name "CHEMSTATIONS".
Therefore, although the Complainant has not substantiated its rights to the name Chemstations by a registered trademark, it appears
that it has sufficiently alleged the existence of common law trademark rights.
As it was specified in Julia F. Roberts v. Russel Boyd (WIPO, D2000-0210) and in Jeanette Winterson v. Mark Hogarth (WIPO, D2000-0235),
the ICANN rules do not require that the Complainant own a registration but "legal rights" to a name.
Hence, Article 4 of the UDRP is application to this matter.
B. Respondent's rights or legitimate interests in the domain name
The web-site www.chemstations.com is not operated in any way by Batchcad in order to promote its activity.
The homepage which can be found at the URL www.chemstations.com, stated the following, at the date of commencement of the proceeding:
"IMPORTANT NOTICE BatchCAD is the most powerful, reliable and widely used simulator for batch process development. Chemstations Inc.
of Houston Texas no longer supplies this product. For a full list of BatchCAD agents world wide and latest developments in dynamic
batch simulation, please visit the BatchCAD web site."
Such use of the domain name in question is not legitimate.
In addition, the panel notes that the Registrant has not submitted his Response and, therefore, has not demonstrated its rights or
legitimate interests in its domain name under paragraph 4(c) of the UDRP
C. Bad faith Registration and Use
Paragraph 4(b) of the UDRP describes the following circumstances as probative of a registrant's bad faith:
(i) circumstances indicating that you have registered or you have acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling,
renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the Complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark
or to a competitor of that Complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of your documented out-of-pocket costs directly related
to the domain name; or
(ii) you have registered the domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark
in a corresponding domain name, provided that you have engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or
(iii) you have registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or
(iv) 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.
Bad faith should be examined in light of the fact that (1) Chemstations Inc. and BatchCad Ltd. are competitors and (2) the registrant
does not operate the site in order to promote its activities
Therefore, bad faith can be gleaned from the fact that the Registrant has registered chemstations.com in order to keep Chemstations,
Inc., a competitor, from using its name as a domain name.
In addition, the mention which appears on the web-site www.chemstations.com confirms that the Registrant has deliberately pre-empted
the name www.chemstations.com in order to divert prospects from Chemstations' products to their competing products.
As a result, the Complainant has demonstrated bad faith registration, as well as bad faith use.
6. Conclusions
It appears to the Panel that the Complainant has demonstrated bad faith registration and bad faith use of the domain name chemstations.com,
based on its common law trademark rights to the name "CHEMSTATIONS", in accordance with the provisions of the UDRP.
In conclusion, the panel decides to transfer the domain name chemstations.com to the Complainant.
7. Signature
At Paris
July 10, 2000
(s) Bruno Grégoire Sainte Marie
Presiding Panelist
|
