点击上方“里格律师事务所”，关注我们哦

In April of this year, the Experts Group of the Hong Kong Secretariat Panel of the Asian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Center (hereinafter referred to as ADNDRC) made a decision on the Domain Name dispute cases (Case No. HK-1700951) between Tencent Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (腾讯科技（深圳）有限公司) (referred to as ‘Tencent’ (腾讯)), the owner of registered trademarks ‘TENCENT’, ‘WECHAT’, ‘QQ’, and natural person Mr. Zhou (周某), the holder of the disputed Domain Names. The Panel ruled to support the Complainant Tencent's claim that all 129 disputes Domain Names be transferred to Tencent.

These 129 generic top-level domains (such as .com / .net / .org, etc.) are presented in the UDRP process and are subject to Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy and rules of Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (refers to as ‘ICANN’). The core principles and rules of Domain Name disputes could be summarized into three indispensable elements. In order to obtain the Panel’s favor, the Complainant Tencent must provide evidences showing the three required elements are satisfied at the same time in this case.

Three elements

1. The disputed Domain Names are identical or confusingly similar to the trademark of the goods or the services mark to which the Complainant is entitled;

   
   

2. The Respondent does not have the right or a legitimate interest in the disputed Domain Name;

   
   

3. The Respondent is malicious concerning the registration and use of the Domain Name.

Key Points in the Case

1.  Whether the disputed Domain Names are identical or confusingly similar to Tencent’s trademarks？

In 2015 and 2016, the Respondent registered hundreds of Domain Names, such as tencentapp.com, wechatiot.cn, qqfamily.com.cn. Meanwhile, the Complainant Tencent have possessed a number of ‘TENCENT’, ‘QQ’ and ‘WECHAT’ trademarks since 2002, 2002 and 2012 respectively, where the registration date of these trademarks is far earlier than that of the disputed Domain Name, and so far remains effective.

The Panel believed that the registered trademarks of the Complainant are distinctive symbols of significance and are not generic terms. The disputed Domain Names contain mainly the registered trademark of the Complainant and other insignificant vocabularies (such as dream, pay, buy, etc.). The existence of these vocabularies in these terms do not distinguish the disputed Domain Names from the registered trademarks of the Complainant, and on the contrary, strengthen the link between the two due to the relevance between these words and the Complainant’s business.

Therefore, the main parts of the disputed Domain Names are similar to the registered trademarks of the Complainant’s prior rights. It is easy for the public to mistakenly believe that the websites using the disputed Domain Names are the websites of the Complainant or have some connection with the complainant. 

2. Whether the Respondent does not have a right -to or legitimate interest- in the disputed Domain Name? 

The complainant's evidence shows that the Respondent did not hold any trademark of ‘TENCENT’, ‘QQ’, ‘WECHAT’ or a trademark containing wording of ‘TENCENT’, ‘QQ’, ‘WECHAT’, the Complainant never authorized or permitted the Respondent uses the ‘TENCENT’, ‘QQ’ or ‘WECHAT’ trademarks, and the Respondent is not affiliated with the Complainant in any way. Moreover, the disputed Domain Names did not direct individuals to any website, on the contrary, part of the disputed Domain Names case pointed to a sale page of the Domain Names.

In Domain Name dispute cases, the burden of proof is usually transferred to the Respondent once the Complainant has provided prima facie evidence that the Respondent has no right or legitimate interest in the disputed Domain Name. In the present case, the Respondent has not refuted the Complainant’s claim and has no proof that it has a legitimate interest in the disputed Domain Names or that there is evidence that the Respondent is going to execute fair use or non-commercial use of the disputed Domain Names, or intentionally mislead the consumer to obtain commercial interests.

3. Whether the Respondent is malicious about the registration and use of the disputed Domain Names?

As mentioned above, the Complainant owned registered trademarks apparently earlier than the Respondent owned the Domain Names. Moreover, the Complainant has invested a great amount of money and effort to promote its trademarks. Nowadays, products and services to which the trademarks direct have made great success which is widely involved in modern people's daily life. These brands are household names. In addition, these trademarks are not generic or ordinary terms. It is unlikely to be a mere coincidence that the Respondent chose these trademarks as the main part of the disputed Domain Names to register accidentally or by chance.

In light of the reputation established by the Complainant itself, the Panel had reason to presume that the Respondent was unaware of the existence of the Complainant and its registered trademarks, and registered the disputed Domain Names purely on the basis of coincidence. Therefore, the Panel held that the Respondent’s registration behavior was malicious as he knew that he had no legal interest in the trademarks.

More evidences stated clearly that the Respondent had never put the disputed Domain Names into actual use upon the registration, but placed some of the disputed Domain Names on the Internet for public sale, mentioning ‘TENCENT’, ‘QQ’, ‘WECHAT’ on multiple sale pages. In addition, the Respondent had registered more than 2,300 Domain Names, many of which contained registered trademarks of others.

点击“阅读原文”，查看更多信息

本文仅为信息分享之目的提供，任何内容均不构成里格律师事务所的任何法律意见或建议。如需了解更多信息，欢迎联系我们：

上海里格律师事务所 

 A&Z Law Firm | 上海リーグ法律事務所

上海茂名南路58号 花园饭店6楼
TEL:(8621)5466-5477

FAX:(8621)5466-5977
URL:www.A-ZLF.com.cn  　　　　　　
■上海Shanghai ■大连Dalian■北京Beijing 

 ■武汉Wuhan ■东京Tokyo

【欢迎订阅】欢迎关注里格律师事务所微信公众平台，与我们一起探讨法律热点问题，您可以通过以下方式关注我们：

1. 请点击标题下方“里格律师事务所”，点击关注；

2. 请搜索“里格律师事务所”或

微信号“ligeHello”，点击关注；

3. 请扫一扫以下的二维码，点击关注。

里格律师事务所

业务范围↓

外商投资、对外投资、竞争与反垄断、知识产权、M&A/企业重组、劳动社会保障、争议解决、合规与CSR、金融与资本市场、海关物流/海事海商、环境健康安全(EHS)

微信号：ligeHello