Sofia Vergara Wins SofiaVergara.org Domain Name in Arbitration

Sofia Vergara has managed to win the rights to SofiaVergara.org domain name.The complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center.

According to whois records, the domain name was first registered in July,2014.

Here are the most relevant facts from the WIPO decision :

“The Complainant has secured a number of trademark registrations for SOFIA VERGARA in the USA for a range of goods and services

The disputed domain name was registered by the Respondent on July 30, 2014.

The bulk of the site appears to be posts with short reports about and photographs of a number of celebrities. Each of the posts also has at least one “rotating” hyperlinked pay-per-click advertisement.

The onus of proving this requirement, like each element, falls on the Complainant. Panels have recognized the difficulties inherent in proving a negative, however, especially in circumstances where much of the relevant information is in, or likely to be in, the possession of the respondent.

The Complainant states that she has not authorised the Respondent to use the disputed domain name. Nor is the Respondent affiliated with her. The Complainant has not licensed the Respondent to use her trademark. The disputed domain name is plainly not derived from the Respondent’s name. From the available record, the Respondent does not appear to hold any trademarks for the disputed domain name.

If one clicks on the photograph of the celebrity in question in the “post”, one is taken to another “gossip” website at “www.justjared.com”, which appears to be the source of the “posts” on the Respondent’s website to which the disputed domain name resolves.

The Respondent’s claim that the disputed domain name was acquired to operate a fan site establishes that the Respondent was well and truly aware of the Complainant when the Respondent registered the disputed domain name. The Complainant’s name is of course also her registered trademark.

The Panel finds that use of the disputed domain name to generate revenues from pay-per-click advertising associated with stories about other celebrities is use of the disputed domain name in bad faith. The (or the bulk of the) stories and the pay-per-click advertisements have no association with the Complainant. The Respondent therefore appears essentially to be using the Complainant’s name and trademark to attract users to his website to generate pay-per-click revenues unfairly. That is not use of the Complainant’s trademark in good faith under the Policy.”

The complainant managed to establish all the elements required. Therefore, the arbitrator decided to transfer the domain name from the respondent to the complainant.