Complainant – S.A.R.L,1, Rue De Glacis
Respondent – Novation In Limited
Disputed Domain– www.Singer.co.in
Decision – Singer.co.in is forwarded to S.A.R.L,1, Rue De Glacis
In the given dispute the complainant was incorporated as “SINGER COMPANY LIMITED” Complainant has registered the different trademarks in India and worldwide. There are more than 1500 Trademark Registrations including Affiliate companies worldwide.world-wide consisting of the word SINGER and owned by Complainant.
Respondent has Failed to file a formal response to the complaint inspite of two opportunities given to him by the Arbitrator.However, the Respondent sent two Emails.
“I had no idea singer was interested in the domain.what’s The best way to settle this? I don’t want to waste everyone’s time.”
“Sorry for the delayed response.I am the current owner of the domain singer.co.in.I also own sing.co.in and singers.co.in.The reason I purchased these domains are because my wife is an hobbyist singer and she wants to put out her songs in the internet.We have no connection with any sewing related activities.Having said that ,I understand that the company singer owns trademark .I’d happy to sell the domain singer.co.in to them directly and save everyone the hassle of a legal battle.”
1)Registrant’s domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a name, trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights.
–Complainant holds numerous registrations for the mark SINGER all over the world.The SINGER is being used by the Complainant to identify its Goods business.The disputed domain name singer.co.in is confusingly similar to the website and Trademark SINGER of a complainant.
2)The registrant has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of domain name.
The Respondent has not filed any response to rebut Complainant’s prima facie case and Respondent has only sent two brief emails, Respondent has shown his willingness to settle the matter but instead of transferring the domain name Respondent has raised frivolous ground that the purchased the domain name because his wife is a hobbyist singer and she wanted to put her songs on the internet.No evidence has been produced to support his contentions nor Respondent filed a formal response to the allegations made in the complaint.the Respondent has no rights or legitimate or interests in respect of domain name.
3)Registrant’s domain has been registered or being used in bad faith.
The disputed domain name contains the reference to Singer Sewing Machine which is not related to the hobby of singing.And sometimes it is showing like for sale.
It can be concluded that the domain name Singer.co.in identified with the Complainant’s Products/Services, therefore its adoption by the Respondent shows “Opportunistic bad faith.
Honorable Arbitrator Mr Aswininie Kumar Bansal taken the decision as the complainant has succeeded in its complaint.
Singer is a popular trademark at the same time a popular generic keyword too, “respondent has screwed up the decision by offering the domain name for sale in response to INDRP notice“. This is clearly teaching a lesson for future respondents, ” DO NOT OFFER YOUR DOMAIN FOR SALE” while responding to a formal INDRP notice.
Please read the further details about the dispute “Singer.co.in pending dispute decision”
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not necessarily reflect the views of Our.in and Our.in does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.