ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION CENTER Alternative Dispute Resolution Proceeding Case No. DSE2025-0027 1. Petitioner The Petitioner is Bered Sverige AB, Sweden. 2. Domain Holder The Domain Holder is Global Vantage AB, Sweden. 3. Domain Name and Procedural History This Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding relates to the domain name . 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. In accordance with Section 13 of the .se Rules, the Center formally notified the Domain Holder of the Petition on September 26, 2025. The Domain Holder submitted a response on October 26, 2025. The Center appointed Per Carlson as the sole Arbitrator in this matter on November 4, 2025. 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 Background The Petitioner is running a business comprising other retail sale via mail order houses or via Internet and is the holder of the European Union trade mark BERED, registered on January 10, 2023 (No 018764198) for, among other things, first-aid boxes in class 5 and retail services for pharmaceutical, veterinary and sanitary preparations and medical supplies in class 35. The Domain Holder is the holder of the disputed domain name , originally registered on July 25, 2024.
page 2 5. Claim The Petitioner has requested that the disputed domain name be transferred to the Petitioner. The Domain Holder has contested the request. 6. Parties’ Contentions A. Petitioner In support of its claim the Petitioner has relied on the grounds, that the disputed domain name , is identical or similar to the Petitioner’s registered trade mark BERED, that the domain name has been registered and used in bad faith and that the Domain Holder has no rights or justified interest in the domain name. The Petitioner has stated, inter alia, the following allegations. The domain name is identical to the Petitioner’s registered trade mark BERED. The brand BERED has been actively used in commerce since 2020 in Sweden and other EU countries in connection with crisis preparedness, self-sufficiency and water purification products. The trade mark is well-known among customers and the Petitioner operates the website “www.bered.nu”, which has attracted significant traffic and commercial recognition. The domain name remained inactive for several years. It was only after the Petitioner gained greater national and international attention (featured in French news and TikTok clips received between 100k-700k views) in November 2024 through the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency’s (“MSB”) widely distributed preparedness brochure, that the Domain Holder suddenly published content related to crisis preparedness. The MSB brochure was sent to every household in Sweden, resulting in a measurable and documented spike in searches for “beredskap” and “bered” and a corresponding traffic spike to the Petitioner’s website “www.bered.nu”. Soon after, the website “www.bered.se” started displaying near-identical content on preparedness, using the exact same thematic language, blog format and topics such as: “How to prepare for power outages”, “The importance of food and water storage” and “The benefits of prepping and self-sufficiency”. The timing, content and choice of domain name clearly suggest that the Domain Holder has acted in bad faith, seeking to exploit public interest driven by the Petitioner’s visibility and branding efforts. The Petitioner tried to get in contact with the CEO of the Domain Holder to solve this situation but received no response. The Petitioner contacted the domain host, Rymdweb.com, and received an email reply stating “It appears that our customer is preparing business activity in Nice Classes other than 5 and 35”. After being offline for a period of time the website displayed a placeholder for an accounting firm. The Domain Holder has now once again switched to a blog within crisis preparation. The Domain Holder has also added the disclaimer: “Independent blog – not affiliated with Bered Sverige AB”. This does not eliminate confusion, instead it confirms an intent to hold onto the domain name by masking the issue. Despite this, the page layout, content category and language still mirror the Petitioner’s registered brand and operations. This superficial change is a strategic move to retain the domain name while continuing to leech traffic and search engine optimization authority generated by the Petitioner’s domain name . The confusion is not hypothetical – multiple customers have mistakenly referred to the domain name , believing it to be associated with the Petitioner. And the Petitioner can only confirm the customers understanding that they have sent an email to the wrong email address Since the Petitioner has received so much traffic and attention the past months and ha such a strong brand, it’s safe to say that there
page 3 are countless people that have tried to contact the Petitioner via the domain name . This directly harms the Petitioner’s registered brand, reputation and conversion in several ways. The Domain Holder has never used the domain name in a consistent or legitimate business manner, neither before nor after the Petitioner’s trade mark became known. The switch from crisis-preparedness content to a fabricated accounting firm homepage was clearly reactive and not based on an established business. There is no indication that the Domain Holder is commonly known under the name “Bered,” nor that the Domain Holder is the holder of any trade mark or company registration or has legitimate commercial use that justifies ownership of the domain name. The Petitioner has received several documented cases of consumer confusion due to the disputed domain name , further indicating a lack of justifiable interest and reinforcing the case for abusive use. B. Domain Holder The Domain Holder has admitted that the domain name , apart from the top-level domain .se, is identical to the Petitioner’s trade mark BERED, but has contested that the domain name has been registered or used in bad faith, as well as that the Domain Holder has no rights nor justified interest in the domain name. The Domain Holder has in substance submitted the following. The mere fact that the disputed domain name is identical to the Petitioner’s trade mark BERED, does not mean that the Petitioner’s sole right to use the trade mark is extended to the Domain Holder’s use of the disputed domain name. The Swedish word “bered” is an established part of speech (imperative of the Swedish word “bereda”), closely connected to the Swedish words “kris”, “beredd” and “beredskap” (crisis, prepared, preparedness). The Domain Holder is using the word “bered” in a linguistic and editorial way, not as a trade symbol for goods or services. The Petitioner has not presented any independent basis for the trade mark being well known. Moreover, the excerpt from EUIPO shows that the registration of the trade mark BERED is not based on acquired distinctive character. Thus, the Petitioner’s trade mark BERED is not well known. Furthermore, the Petitioner’s trade mark is registered for inter alia retail services in relation to stockpile products. The Domain Holder is not conducting any sales activities, nor any advertising or affiliates. The Domain Holder’s use of the domain name is non-commercial and informative. There is no likelihood of confusion between the domain name and the trade mark BERED. Wrongly addressed e-mails only show that individual customers occasionally has addressed their emails to “[…]@bered.se” instead of “[…]@bered.nu”. The Domain Holder’s traffic spike shows only quite a low Swedish traffic, which tells against the assertion that a significant number of confusions has occurred. A search for related words like “beredskap” (preparedness) results in a list where the Petitioner’s website “www.bered.nu” is placed so far down, that the Petitioner’s website most probably does not receive any organic visitors. If the Petitioner’s website would be well known and established on the market, the website would have turned up at a search on the internet. The Domain Holder acquired the domain name in July 2024, after the former holder of the domain name had not renewed the registration. Thus, the Domain Holder acquired the domain name several months before the release of MSB brochure on emergency preparedness in November 2024.
page 4 On the website “www.bered.se”, the Domain Holder has published independently written articles and neutral articles, without using BERED as a trade symbol and without copying the Petitioner’s texts/pictures or graphical design. Publishing texts on emergency preparedness after a national campaign of information is not evidence of “targeting” the Petitioner. The Domain Holder has never tried to mislead or sell the domain name. The Domain Holder has never offered the domain name to the Petitioner nor to a third party, never passed off the website as being the Petitioner’s and has published a clear disclaimer explaining that there is no connection between the Domain Holder and the Petitioner. The Domain Holder has a justified interest in the domain name , since the domain name was acquired after the former holder’s failure to renew the registration. The domain name is used in its linguistic meaning (kris-bered-skap/beredd) for neutral and editorial purposes. The domain name is not used for advertisements or retail services, nor as a trade symbol, and the website contains no affiliate links. A holder of a domain name must not be holder of a trade mark to have a justified interest in the domain name. Nor must the holder of a domain name be well known to have a justified interest in domain name. A legitimate linguistic use of the domain name is sufficient. 7. Discussion and Findings In accordance with paragraph 7.2 of the .se Policy, a domain name may be transferred to the party requesting dispute resolution proceedings, if the following three conditions are fulfilled: 1. the domain name is identical or similar to inter alia a trade mark, which is legally recognized in Sweden and to which the party requesting dispute resolution can prove its rights; 2. the domain name has been registered or used in bad faith, and 3. the domain holder has no rights or justified interest in the domain name. A. The Domain Name is identical or similar to a name which is legally recognized in Sweden and to which the Petitioner can prove its rights The Petitioner is the holder of the European Union trade mark BERED, legally recognized in Sweden. The disputed domain name is identical to the Petitioner’s said trade mark BERED. B. The Domain Name has been registered or used in bad faith According to the facts of the case, the disputed domain name was registered by the Domain Holder on July 25, 2024, after it had been deactivated and available. Thus, the domain name was registered by the Domain Holder, after the registration of the Petitioner’s trade mark on January 10, 2023. The Swedish word “bered” is the imperative mood of the verb “bereda”, meaning inter alia prepare. The word “bered” is not unusual in sentences expressing an urgent request to prepare, such as “Bered er på det värsta!” (“prepare for the worst”). But use of “Bered!” as a single imperative is extremely unusual, if it even occurs. And according to what is generally known, the word “bered” is not used in trade, neither in description of good or services nor in the demand of products. There is no clear and convincing evidence that the Petitioner’s trade mark BERED is well-known for any of the goods or services for which it is registered. Nor is there any substantial evidence that the Domain Holder actually was aware of the Petitioner’s business or trade mark at the time of the acquisition of the domain name. It is common ground between the parties, that the Domain Holder, on January 14, 2025, on the website at “www.bered.se” published tips on preparedness (“Beredskapstips”). In view of the fact, that use of “bered” as a single word is most unusual, the mere publication of “Beredskapstips” on the website indicates that the Domain Holder at the time of the said publication was aware of the Petitioner’s business and trade mark.
page 5 Furthermore, the publication – empty of substantial content, as it appears according to the facts of the case – is designed merely to attract traffic to the website. In an overall assessment, it can be taken for certain that the Domain Holder, at the time of the aforementioned publication, was aware of the Petitioner’s business and trade mark. Thus, the disputed domain name has been used in bad faith. C. The Domain Holder has no rights or justified interest in the Domain Name The Domain Holder has not stated any fact that would constitute rights or a justified interest in the domain name. 8. Decision The disputed domain name shall be transferred to the Petitioner. 9. Summary The disputed domain name is identical to the trade mark BERED. The disputed domain name has been used in bad faith in the meaning of the .se Policy. And the Domain Holder has not stated any fact that would constitute a right or a justified interest in the disputed domain name. Per Carlson Date: November 24, 2025
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy