The Complainant is Federated Hermes, Inc., United States of America (“United States), represented by SafeNames Ltd., United Kingdom.
The Respondent is Withheld for Privacy Purposes, Privacy Service Provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf. Iceland / Deluxyq Qee, United States.
2. The Domain Name and RegistrarThe disputed domain name
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on September 22, 2021. On September 23, 2021, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On September 23, 2021, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the disputed domain name which differed from the named Respondent and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to the Complainant on September 24, 2021 providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting the Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. The Complainant filed an amended Complaint on September 27, 2021.
The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified the Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on October 7, 2021. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was October 27, 2021. The Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on October 28, 2021.
The Center appointed Lynda Zadra-Symes as the sole panelist in this matter on December 1, 2021. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7.
4. Factual BackgroundComplainant is a global investment and sustainability manager headquartered in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Complainant was founded in 1955 and became Federated Hermes, Inc. in February 2020, combining the brands of HERMES INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT and FEDERATED INVESTORS. Complainant serves investors around the globe in regions including London, New York, Dublin, Singapore and Sydney and has approximately USD 619.4 billion assets under management, 1.3 trillion assets under advice, and more than 1,900 employees in 12 offices in North America, Europe and Asia. Complainant is also listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
Complainant offers several financial services, including 135 different types of mutual funds. Clients of the Complainant include corporations, governed entitites, insurance companies, foundations and endowments, banks and broker/dealers.
Hermes Investment Management (“Hermes”) was originally founded in 1983, operating as the managers of pension schemes for the British Post Office and British Telecoms (“BT”). Hermes has been using the mark HERMES since 1995, officially becoming known as HERMES INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT in 2014, while maintaining the corporate name of HERMES FUND MANAGERS LIMITED. Complainant’s acquisition of Hermes achieved widespread media coverage. In 2018, the Federated Investors, Inc. paid GBP 246 million to acquire a 60% stake in Hermes. In 2020, Federated Investors Inc. incorporated HERMES into its branding. Complainant has received multiple industry awards for its services and commitments to sustainability, such as “Sustainable Investment Awards 2021,” “OpRisk Awards 2020,” the “Asset Management Awards,” among others.
Complainant, its affiliates, subsidiaries and associated companies own trademarks within numerous jurisdictions, including the following:
Federated HERMES and Design International Registration No. 1561213 registered July 9, 2020
FEDERATED HERMES International Registration No. 1545766 registered July 9, 2020
Complainant registered the domain name
Google Trends data indicates that, even after Complainant’s rebrand to FEDERATED HERMES, online users continue to search for HERMES INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT.
Complainant’s Hermes Investment Management arm of the company has, for many years, incorporated a wing logo design as part of its HERMES INVESTMENT brand.
On July 15, 2021, Complainant sent Respondent a cease and desist letter. Respondent did not respond to the letter, but edited the content of the website at the disputed domain name by removing Complainant’s winged logo from the masthead of the website and replacing it with another logo.
5. Parties’ Contentions A. ComplainantComplainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademarks, that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name and that the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
B. RespondentThe Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and FindingsIn order to succeed in its claim, Complainant must demonstrate that all of the elements enumerated in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy have been satisfied:
(i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and
(ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the disputed domain name; and
(iii) the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs the Panel to decide a complaint “on the basis of the statements and documents submitted and in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable”.
A. Identical or Confusingly SimilarComplainant submitted evidence indicating that Complainant and its associated companies have acquired through extensive use a strong global reputation in the HERMES and HERMES INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT trademarks in the financial and investment sectors.
The disputed domain name incorporates the dominant elements of Complainant’s HERMES and HERMES INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT marks. Respondent’s inclusion of the terms “INVESTMENT” and “LTD” in the disputed domain name does not avoid a finding of confusing similarity.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademarks.
B. Rights or Legitimate InterestsComplainant submits that Respondent has not registered any trademarks for the HERMES INVESTMENT or FEDERATED HERMES terms. Complainant has not licensed Respondent to use the disputed domain name or any domain name featuring the marks HERMES INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT or FEDERATED HERMES. There is no evidence in the record showing that Respondent is commonly known by the disputed domain name.
Respondent uses the domain name to host a website that claims to allegedly offer services identical to that of Complainant. The record indicates that Respondent is using the disputed domain name to impersonate Complainant, and has also used Complainant’s distinctive logo as part of the masthead of Respondent’s website, showing an intention to target Complainant. Respondent has also carried out phishing attacks using the disputed domain name, which Complainant was alerted to when a member of the public wished to confirm whether the email genuinely emanated from Complainant. Respondent used the disputed domain name to contact customers of the Complainant, offering the opportunity to open an escrow account and make money transfers to an unverified account. Such use is not a bona fide offering of goods or services and can never confer rights or legitimate interest on a respondent.
There is no plausible reason for Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain name other than to take advantage of Complainant’s goodwill and reputation in its marks.
The record is devoid of any facts that establish any rights or legitimate interests of Respondent in the disputed domain name. Instead, the record indicates that Respondent knowingly adopted Complainant’s marks in the disputed domain name in an effort to create the false impression that Respondent is associated with Complainant and is an authorized representative of Complainant to defraud unsuspecting consumers into providing their financial information, or providing payment, to Respondent for Respondent’s personal profit and gain.
The Panel finds that Complainant has satisfied the requirement of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy.
C. Registered and Used in Bad FaithThe record indicates that the disputed domain name is being used in connection with a fraudulent scam designed to lure consumers into believing that they are being contacted by Complainant in order to defraud consumers into providing personal and financial information.
The record indicates that Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s rights in its marks prior to registering the disputed domain name and that Respondent registered and used the disputed domain name in connection with a fraudulent scam for Respondent’s commercial gain by intentionally creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s marks.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that Respondent has registered and used the disputed domain name in bad faith.
7. DecisionFor the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name,
Lynda Zadra-Symes
Sole Panelist
Date: December 14, 2021