It was held in the case of ESPN Inc. v. Domain Admin that the use of a domain name that is a well-known mark to promote competing or infringing products cannot be considered bonafide offering of goods and services. Even where a party passively holds a domain name conflicting with that of a well-known mark, it constitutes bad faith.
Brief facts and background of the case
It is known that the complainant ESPN Inc. is a well-known company incorporated under prevalent Corporate Laws of the United States of America. The complainant provides sports entertainment services, including media coverage and broadcasting of sports world over through all media sources.
A complaint was filed with the National Internet Exchange of India on August 18, 2016 by ESPN against the Respondent “Domain Admin” who registered the domain name
www.espn.co.in GoDaddy.com . The Exchange had verified the complaint and discerned that it satisfied all the formal requirements of the Indian Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy and the Rules framed thereunder.
A copy of the complaint was sent by the Sole Arbitrator Mr. Vinod K Agarwal to the respondent at their address registered in the WHOIS data records. However, no response was received from the end of the respondents pursuant to which the proceedings were initiated ex-parte. Also, the respondent’s activities remain unknown.
The complainant contended that all elements specified in the policy were applicable to the dispute at hand. The complainant stated that they have been using their trademark ESPN in India as trade name, corporate name, business name, trading style etc. since 1994 without any interruption. The complainant further contended that their trademark registration in respect of ESPN is valid and still subsisting.