Decisión del Panel Administrativo nº D2021-2756 of WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center, October 14, 2021 (case Nordic Nest AB v. Anette Grostad)
| Resolution Date | October 14, 2021 |
| Issuing Organization | WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center |
| Decision | Complaint denied |
| Dominio | Generic Domains |
The Complainant is Nordic Nest AB, Sweden, represented by Hansson Thyresson AB, Sweden.
The Respondent is Anette Grostad, United States of America.[1]
The disputed domain name [shopnordicnest.com] is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on August 23, 2021. On August 24, 2021, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On August 24, 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 August 29, 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 amendment to the Complaint on August 30, 2021.
The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to the 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 August 30, 2021. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was September 19, 2021. An initial Response was filed with the Center on August 31, 2021, and then an updated Response was filed with the Center on September 19, 2021.
The Center appointed Antony Gold as the sole panelist in this matter on September 30, 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.
The Complainant is a company based in Kalmar, Sweden. It was established in 2002 under the name “Scandinavian Design Center” but changed its trading name to “Nordic Nest” in May 2019. The Complainant markets and retails a variety of homeware products, including furniture, tableware, lighting, rugs, and textiles, which are sold in over 70 countries. It presently has 350 employees.
The Complainant has protected its NORDIC NEST brand through trade mark registrations in various countries including:
- European Union Trade Mark, registration number 013823778 for NORDIC NEST, in classes 21, 24, and 27, registered on July 9, 2015;
- United States Trade Mark, registration number 5887810 for NORDIC NEST in classes 21, 24, and 27, filed on March 1, 2019 and registered on October 22, 2019.[2]
The disputed domain name was registered on November 9, 2016. It resolves to a website branded as “Nordic Nest” which offers for sale a variety of products under the categories of “Gifts”, “Essentials”, “Kids”, “Lifestyle”, “Yarn Shop”, and “Scandinavian Candy”.
The Complainant says that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark in which it has rights. It refers to its NORDIC NEST trade marks, full details of one of these marks having been set out above, and says that its mark is incorporated in the disputed domain name in its entirety. The addition of the generic term “shop” in the disputed domain name does not serve to distinguish it from the Complainant’s NORDIC NEST mark.
The Complainant says also that the Respondent does not have rights or a legitimate interest in respect of the disputed domain name. The Respondent does not have any trade mark rights in “Shop Nordic Nest”, nor is the respondent a licensee of the Complainant, nor has the Complainant given the Respondent any authorization to register its trade mark in a domain name.
In earlier decisions under the Policy, UDRP panels have said that the use of a domain name cannot be considered reasonable where the domain name falsely suggests an affiliation with the trade mark owner or if it is used as a pretext to obtain commercial gain. The Respondent is using the trade mark NORDIC NEST in...
To continue reading
Request your trial