Domain name-Domain name resolution policy-Cybersquatting-Bad faith-Diversion of business-Identical-Confusingly similar – Reversed name.

Complainant is the owner of several casinos in the US which use the service and trade name HOLLYWOOD CASINO.  Complainant owns registered trademark HOLLYWOOD CASINO.   Complainant also uses the marks HOLLYWOODCASINO.COM, and HOLLYWOODCASINO.NET as domain names for its portal web sites for its goods and services.  Complainant has invested substantial sums of money in developing and marketing the name HOLLYWOOD CASINO.  Respondent is the owner of the domain name CASINOHOLLYWOOD.COM.

Held: Domain Name Transferred to Complainant

The names Hollywood Casino and Casino Hollywood are confusingly similar.  A consumer who uses the web site owned by Respondent would likely believe that the web site was authorized or sponsored by the business of Complainant. 

Respondent has registered and used the domain name “CASINOHOLLYWOOD.COM” in bad faith.  Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract Internet users to its web site or other online location for commercial gain.  Respondent has done so by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s mark as to be the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of Respondent’s web site or of a product or service on Respondent’s web site.

Policies referred to:

Uniform Domain Name Resolution Policy Adopted August 6, 1999

Statutes referred to:

Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy
 
 

Cases referred to:
--
 
 

The above-entitled matter came on for an administrative hearing on June 16, 2000 before the undersigned on the Complaint of Hollywood Casino Corporation, hereafter “Complainant," against B. F. LLC, hereafter “Respondent." Complainant was represented by Seidel, Gonda, Lavorgna & Monaco, P.C.. Upon the written submitted record, the following Decision is made:PROCEDURAL FINDINGSDomain Name: casinohollywood.comDomain Name Registrar: Network Solutions, Inc.Domain Name Registrant: B.F. LLCDates of Domain Registration: December 10, 1997Date Complaint Filed: May 3, 2000Date of Commencement of Administrative Proceeding in Accordance with Rule 2(a) and Rule 4(c): May 9, 2000Response Filed: May 27, 2000After reviewing the Complaint, and determining it to be in administrative compliance, the National Arbitration Forum (The Forum) forwarded the Complaint to the Respondent on May 9, 2000, in compliance with Rule 2(a), and the administrative proceeding was commenced pursuant to Rule 4(c). In compliance with Rule 4(d), The Forum immediately notified Network Solutions, Inc. ("Network Solutions"), the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers ("ICANN"), and the Respondent that the administrative proceeding had commenced. Respondent did submit a response to The Forum within twenty (20) days pursuant to Rule 5(a). The Complainant filed a Supplemental Statement on June 6, 2000.Respondent registered the domain name in dispute with Network Solutions on December 10, 1997. By registering the foregoing domain name with Network Solutions, Respondent agreed to resolve any dispute regarding said name through ICANN’S Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") and the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").FINDINGS OF FACT1. The Complainant is the owner of casinos in Illinois and Mississippi which use the service mark and trade name “HOLLYWOOD CASINO” and which offer gaming, dining, bar services and entertainment. These casinos have operated in Illinois and Mississippi since 1993 and 1994 respectively. Complainant is also building a casino in Louisiana.2. Complainant is the owner of eight (8) valid and subsisting registrations on the Principal Register of the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office using the name “HOLLYWOOD CASINO." Complainant also uses the mark “HOLLYWOODCASINO.COM” and “HOLLYWOODCASINO.NET” as domain names for its portal Web sites for its goods and services.3. The Complainant has invested substantial sums of money in developing and marketing the name “HOLLYWOOD CASINO” both nationally and at its various locations.4. Respondent is the owner of the domain name “CASINOHOLLYWOOD.COM”5. The domain name in question is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered domain names and its registrations with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.6. It is very likely that a consumer who uses the Casino Hollywood online gaming would believe that the web site was sponsored or authorized by Hollywood Casino because the names Hollywood Casino and Casino Hollywood are confusingly similar.CONCLUSIONThe undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and has no known conflict of interest to serve as the Arbitrator in this proceeding. Having been duly selected, and being impartial, the undersigned concludes that Respondent has registered and used the domain name "CASINOHOLLYOOD.COM" in bad faith in that it intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of its web site or of a product or service on its web site.DECISIONBased upon the above findings and conclusions, and pursuant to Rule 15, it is decided that the domain name “casinohollywood.com” registered by respondent B.F. LLC be transferred to complainant Hollywood Casino Corporation.DATED this 16th day of June, 2000. Bruce E. Meyerson, Arbitrator