The Petitioner is Nasdaq Stockholm Aktiebolag,Sweden, represented by Sterne, Kessler Goldstein & Fox, PLLC, United States of America.
2. Domain HolderThe Domain Holder is Host Master, 1337 Services LLC, Saint Kitts and Nevis.
3. Domain Names and Procedural HistoryThis Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding relates to the domain names
This Petition was filed under the Terms and Conditions of registration (the “.se Policy”) and the Instructions governing Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding for domain names in the top-level domain .se (the “.se Rules”).
The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (“the Center”) verified that the Petition satisfied the formal requirements of the .se Policy and the .se Rules. The Center sent an invitation to amend the Petition on October 27, 2021. The Petitioner submitted an amended Petition on October 29, 2021. In accordance with Section 13 of the .se Rules, the Center formally notified the Domain Holder of the Petition on November 5, 2021. The Domain Holder did not submit any response and, accordingly, the Center notified the Domain Holder's default on December 6, 2021.
The Center appointed Gunnar Karnell as the sole Arbitrator in this matter on December 10, 2021. The Arbitrator has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with Section 1 of the .se Rules.
4. Factual BackgroundThe Petitioner is a stock exchange and the primary securities exchange of the Nordic countries.
In support of its claim, the Petitioner refers in this proceeding that its trade name is legally recognized in Sweden, as it is registered as a Swedish private limited company by the Swedish Companies Registration Office under its present trade name since December 1, 2015, with organization number 556420-8394.
The Domain Holder registered the disputed domain names
The Petitioner requests that the disputed domain names
The Petitioner is the primary securities exchange of the Nordic countries. It is legally recognized in Sweden, having maintained an active company registration under its present trade name since December 1, 2015. The disputed domain names were registered several years after the Petitioner established rights to its trade name, in comparison to which observable differences in both the disputed domain names do not eliminate confusing similarity.
The Domain Holder is using the disputed domain names to illegally profit from the Petitioner’s reputation and to disrupt its business by creating an impression of being associated with the Petitioner. The Domain Holder registered and uses the disputed domain names “to trade off Petitioner’s good reputation, to usurp Internet traffic rightly intended for Petitioner, to defraud Petitioner’s clients, and to otherwise disrupt Petitioner’s business”. The Petitioner claims that the Domain Holder’s registration and use of the disputed domain names “for its website and fraudulent email scams” are in bad faith.
The Domain Holder has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names. It is not commonly known by these disputed domain names. The Domain Holder is not making any legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain names without intention to mislead and divert consumers for Domain Holder’s commercial and financial gain. The Domain Holder is by no means associated with the Petitioner and is authorized to use the Petitioner’s trade name. The Petitioner claims that the Domain Holder uses the disputed domain names “for illegal activity, phishing and fraud”, thus making “liberal use of Petitioner’s tradename throughout its website” which cannot be considered legitimate.
7. Discussion and Findings 7.1 Procedural Issues - Consolidation of Multiple Domain NamesPursuant to Section 7(a) of the .se Rules, “if a party is petitioning for a dispute resolution proceeding for several domain names simultaneously against the same domain holder, the petitions shall be handled in a single proceeding, if they are supported by the same rights which are legally recognized in Sweden”.
In the present proceeding, the same Domain Holder is listed as the registrant for both disputed domain names, and both disputed domain names redirected to the Domain Holder’s website at the domain name
Accordingly, the Arbitrator finds that the Petitioner has provided sufficient arguments for consolidation.
7.2 Substantive Issues A. The domain names are identical or similar to a name which is legally recognized in Sweden and to which the Petitioner can prove its rightsThe disputed domain names are identical or similar to the Petitioner’s trade name which is legally recognized in Sweden and to which the Petitioner has proven its rights.
B. The domain names have been registered or used in bad faithThe Arbitrator finds no indication on the above record that might impair the Petitioner’s conclusion that the disputed domain names
Circumstances in support of a Domain Holder’s right or a justified interest in the disputed domain names have not been demonstrated.
8. DecisionThe disputed domain names
Gunnar Karnell
Date: December 16, 2021