Chevron Corporation Advertising

Document Sample
Chevron Corporation Advertising Powered By Docstoc
					                WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center


                       Chevron Corporation v. Young Wook Kim

                                  Case No. D2001-1142

1.   The Parties

     The Complainant is Chevron Corporation, whose address is 575 Market Street, San
     Francisco, California, U.S.A. The Complainant is represented by Harvey S. Kauget,
     Esq. of Holland & Knight LLP, 400 N. Ashley Drive, Tampa, Florida 33602, U.S.A.

     The Respondent is Young Wook Kim, an individual whose address is 224 August
     Court, Rosyln, New York, U.S.A.

2.   The Domain Name and Registrar

     The domain name in dispute is <>. The registrar is Network
     Solutions, Inc. (NSI), 505 Huntmar Park Drive, Herndon, Virginia, U.S.A.

3.   Procedural History

     This dispute is to be resolved in accordance with the Uniform Policy for Domain Name
     Dispute Resolution (the Policy) and Rules (the Rules) approved by the Internet
     Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) on October 24, 1999, and the
     World Intellectual Property Organization Arbitration and Mediation Center's
     Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution (the Center, the
     Supplemental Rules).

     The Complaint was filed electronically on September 18, 2001, and on
     September 21, 2001, in hard copy. On September 20, 2001, the Center requested that
     the registrar NSI check and report back on the registrant for the domain name
     <>. On September 25, 2001, NSI reported to the Center that the
     registrant was the Respondent, that the domain name was on active status, and that the
     registration agreement was in English and subject to the Policy.

                                          Page 1
     On October 1, 2001, the Center forwarded a copy of the Complaint to the Respondent
     by registered mail and by e-mail and this proceeding officially began. The Respondent
     did not submit a response within the 20 day time frame prescribed by Rule 5e, and on
     October 23, 2001, was declared in default. According to Rule 14a, in the absence of
     exceptional circumstances the Panel should proceed to a decision based on the

     The Administrative Panel submitted a Declaration of Impartiality and Independence on
     November 16, 2001, and the Center proceeded to appoint the Panel on
     November 29, 2001. The Panel finds the Center has adhered to the Policy and the
     Rules in administering this Case.

     This Decision is due by December 13, 2001.

4.   Factual Background

     Complainant owns the trademark and service mark Chevron, which is registered in the
     United States. Complainant has used the Chevron mark throughout the world in
     connection with motor fuels for internal combustion engines, lubricating oils and
     flushing oils.

     The Respondent, in default in this proceeding, is an individual connected with the entity
     Mediatech, which sells gas pump display technology for gas stations. The Respondent
     registered the disputed domain name, <> on December 5, 1998.
     There does not seem to have been any correspondence between the parties before the
     Complainant initiated this proceeding seeking transfer of the disputed domain name,

5.   The Parties' Contentions

     Complainant's Summarized Contentions:

     -    Complainant owns the trademark and service mark Chevron. Complainant has
          used the Chevron mark throughout the world in connection with motor fuels for
          internal combustion engines, lubricating oils and flushing oils.

     -    Complainant has registered its Chevron mark in the United States. These
          registrations are currently valid and subsisting (Complaint Annex B).

     -    Over the years, Complainant has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in
          advertising and promoting the Chevron mark. As a result, the mark has become
          famous among the general public and in particular among users of petroleum
          products and related goods and services.

     -    Complainant has developed valuable goodwill and common law rights in the
          Chevron mark throughout the United States and the world. The Chevron mark is
          distinctive and serves to identify the source of Complainant's products and
          services to the consuming public throughout the United States and the world.
          Moreover, the Chevron mark distinguishes Complainant's products and services
          from the products and services of others.

                                           Page 2
-   Besides owning U.S. Trademark Registrations Nos. 416,133 and 364,683 for
    Chevron, Complainant is in the process of merging with Texaco, Inc.
    Specifically, on October 16, 2000, Complainant and Texaco, Inc. announced the
    merger of the two companies. As such, Texaco, Inc. also has several United
    States trademark registrations, including U.S. Trademark Registrations Nos.
    794,947 and No. 57, 902 for Texaco (Complaint Annex B).

-   Consumers readily associate the Chevron mark with Complainant as the result of
    its prominent brand name status in the market place for petroleum products and
    related services. The Respondent has chosen to combine two famous registered
    trademarks using the exact spelling of each of the two famous registered
    trademarks. As a result, the domain name of the Respondent is confusingly
    similar to the Federally Registered Trademarks of Complainant and contains
    Complainant's identical trademark.

-   Further, the inclusion of the top level domain designator <.com> does not help to
    distinguish Respondent's domain name from Complainant's mark.

-   Complainant has not licensed Respondent to use its trademark. Respondent does
    not have any relationship with Complainant that would entitle it to use
    Complainant's trademark.

-   Respondent's company, as advertised at the disputed domain name, is Media
    Tech, which sells display technologies for gas stations (Complaint Annex F).
    Respondent is using Complainant's trademark to aid in the selling of Respondent's
    gas station displays since Complainant and Texaco, Inc. have world-wide fame in
    the gas station industry.

-   The <> domain name was registered in bad faith and is being
    used in bad faith. The disputed domain name is being used to attract customers to
    sell Respondent's "Ezchanger System" for displays in gasoline pumps (Complaint
    Annex F).

-   Respondent also knew that by taking control of the domain name, it would
    interfere with Complainant's business by diverting potential customers away from
    Complainant’s websites, and create among potential customers the mistaken
    belief that the <> website is related to the actual website of

-   Respondent's unauthorized use of the confusingly similar Chevron mark indicates
    to the public that Respondent, his products, and/or his services originate with
    Chevron, or are affiliated, connected or associated with Complainant, or are
    sponsored, endorsed, or approved by Complainant.

-   The Respondent, by using the disputed domain name, <>, has
    intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to his
    website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the trademarks of
    Complainant as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of his

-   The Respondent's use of the disputed domain name cannot be said to be a
    legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name. It is clear that

                                    Page 3
          the Respondent's intent of using the disputed domain name is to misleadingly
          divert consumers for his own personal commercial gain.

     -    The evidence produced is overwhelming in support of a finding that Respondent
          registered the disputed domain name at issue in this matter in bad faith, and
          continues to use it in bad faith.

     -    The disputed domain name should be transferred to the Complainant.

     Respondent's Contentions:

     The Respondent is in default in this proceeding and thus has not filed any contentions.

6.   Discussion and Findings

     In order for Complainant to prevail and have the disputed domain name <chevron-> transferred to it, the Complainant must prove the following (the Policy,
     para 4(a)(i-iii):

     -    the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service
          mark in which the Complainant has rights; and

     -    the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain
          name; and

     -    the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith

     Identical or Confusingly Similar

     The Complainant has provided exemplary copies of a printout from the
     TESS computerized mark registration system of the United States Patent and
     Trademark Office Pincipal Register showing the Complainant owns the "Chevron"
     mark registrations no. 0416133 dated August 28, 1945 in international class 4 for motor
     fuels for use in internal combustion engines; and "Chevron" mark no. 0364683 dated
     February 14, 1939 for lubricating oils and flushing oils (Complaint Annex B).

     The disputed domain name, <>, clearly contains the Complainant's
     mark. The Panel is aware that another petroleum company's famous mark, viz.
     "Texaco", also is contained in the disputed domain name and that Texaco is not a party
     to this proceeding. However, the Panel finds the Complainant nonetheless satisfies the
     requirements of the Policy at 4a(i): "your domain name is identical or confusingly
     similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights.." In this
     case, the Panel finds the Respondent's domain name, <> is
     confusingly similar to the Complainant's Chevron mark.

     Legitimate Rights or Interests

     The Complainant contends the Respondent has no license or permission from the
     Complainant to use the disputed domain name. The Respondent is in default and thus
     has not attempted to come forward and show any legitimate rights or interests in the
     disputed domain name as provided in the Policy at 4c. The Panel thus finds the
     Respondent has no legitimate rights or interests in the disputed domain name.

                                           Page 4
     Registered and Used in Bad Faith

     Although the Complainant makes an en passant argument that the Respondent
     registered the disputed domain name in violation of the Policy's bad faith provisions at
     4b(iii), the Panel is not persuaded this is true, i.e., that the Respondent registered the
     disputed domain name in order to disrupt the Complainant's business. Certainly, this
     does not appear to have been the Respondent's primary motive in registering the
     disputed domain name.

     On the other hand, the Panel finds the Complainant's argument and supporting evidence
     that the Respondent registered the disputed domain name in order to promote the
     Respondent's gas station pump display system,"EZChanger", hits the nail on the head.
     By adopting the disputed domain name to promote "EZChanger", the Respondent
     hoped Complainant’s famous gas station and related services mark would help sell
     "EZ Changer" because potential customers would associate it with the Complainant,
     Chevron. This violates the bad faith provisions of the Policy at 4b(iv): the Respondent
     has tried to confuse its product with the Complainant for commercial gain.

7.   Decision

     The Panel has found the disputed domain name, <>, is confusingly
     similar to the Complainant's mark Chevron. The Respondent is in default and has not
     attempted to show any legitimate rights or interests in the disputed domain name. The
     Respondent registered and was using the domain name in bad faith by attempting to
     confuse himself with the Complainant in order to further a business related to
     Complainant's business (the Policy at 4b(iv)).

     Pursuant to ICANN Policy para 4(i) and Rule 15, the Panel orders that the disputed
     domain name, <>, be transferred from the Respondent, Young
     Wook Kim, to the Complainant, Chevron Corporation. The Panel is aware that Texaco
     might object to Chevron having sole ownership of a domain name containing both
     companies' marks. However, the on-going merger talks between the two companies
     mean this issue likely is soon to be moot. And even if the two companies ultimately do
     not merge, Texaco would have the same recourse to a proceeding under the Policy or to
     court action that Complainant Chevron had in this proceeding.

                                     Dennis A. Foster
                                      Sole Panelist

                                     December 13, 2001

                                            Page 5

Shared By:
Description: Chevron Corporation Advertising document sample