GENEVA, Switzerland — MojoHost scored another victory in its most recent trademark protection WIPO claim, where they alleged that a competing company “mojohost.tech” had registered multiple, confusingly similar domain names in bad faith.
In December 2020, MojoHost filed a World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) claim against the registrant of the domain "mojohost.tech." The disputed domain name was registered on October 21, 2020. The MojoHost trademark was issued on July 24, 2012. MojoHost has promoted its services as "MojoHost" since 2004.
At the time of the complaint, according to a rep, “MojoHost provided evidence that the domain was being used to link to an email marketing system.”
The respondent did not reply to the complaint, but, the rep noted, “WIPO does not award default decisions based on lack of a response. The same criteria must still be met. Regardless, WIPO stated that the criteria for a successful trademark complaint was met by MojoHost on all three criteria: ‘the Disputed Domain Name is identical with or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complaintant has rights;’ ‘the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name;’ and ‘the Disputed Domain Name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.’”
The panel found that the disputed name was identical to the MojoHost trademarks and found no evidence that the respondent had established any "bonafide offering of goods or services" while using the domain.
The written decision stated that it was "more likely than not that the Respondent would have known of — and sought to target — [MojoHost] when it registered the Disputed Domain Name. Even assuming the Respondent independently coined the name, which seems unlikely, a simple internet search would immediately have revealed the Complainant and its use of the term 'mojohost.’”
The sole WIPO panelist ordered "the Disputed Domain Name <mojohost.tech> be transferred to the Complainant."
“The panelist’s decision was thorough and spot-on in this instance. The Respondent mistakenly believed that MojoHost would sit idle, as he blatantly violated MojoHost intellectual property," said attorney Corey D. Silverstein, who represented MojoHost.
“MojoHost will continue to utilize all available legal tools to protect what it has worked so hard to build. We have already commenced a new action against this Respondent related to another unlawfully acquired domain and are evaluating additional legal options,” Silverstein added.