|
 |
DECISION
Jan Lawrence Zegarac v Corsair
Group/Tenantwise, Inc.
Claim Number: FA0008000095496
PARTIES
The Complainant is Jan Lawrence Zegarac d/b/a/ Manhattan
Office Space, New York, NY, USA ("Complainant").
The Respondent is Corsair Group/TenantWise, Inc., New
York, NY, USA ("Respondent").
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME(s)
The domain name at issue is "manhattan-office-space.com"
registered with All West Communications.
PANELIST(s)
The undersigned (or panelist) certifies that he or she
has acted independently and impartially and to the best of
his or her knowledge, has no known conflict in serving as
the panelist in this proceeding.
Honorable Paul A. Dorf (Ret.) as Panelist.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant submitted a Complaint to the National
Arbitration Forum ("The Forum") electronically on
August 28, 2000; The Forum received a hard copy of the
Complaint on August 28, 2000.
On 08/30/00, All West Communications confirmed by e-mail to
The Forum that the domain name "manhattan-office-space.com"
is registered with All West Communications and that the
Respondent is the current registrant of the name. All West
Communications has verified that Respondent is bound by the
All West Communications registration agreement and has thereby
agreed to resolve domain-name disputes brought by third
parties in accordance with ICANN’s UDRP.
On August 31, 2000, a Notification of Complaint and
Commencement of Administrative Proceeding (the
"Commencement Notification"), setting a deadline of
September 20, 2000 by which Respondent could file a Response
to the Complaint, was transmitted to Respondent via e-mail,
post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on
Respondent’s registration as technical, administrative and
billing contacts, and to postmaster@manhattan-office-space.com
by e-mail.
On September 25, 2000, pursuant to Complainant’s request
to have the dispute decided by a one member panel, the Forum
appointed Honorable Paul D. Dorf (Ret.) as Panelist.
RELIEF SOUGHT
The Complainant requests that the domain name be
transferred from the Respondent to the Complainant.
PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS
A. Complainant
The Complainant contends that the Respondent, by obtaining
and using the domain names that are the subject of this
Complaint, has caused, or is likely to cause, confusion,
mistake or deception to the public as the domain name is
identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s
trademark. Also, the Complainant contends that the Respondent
has no rights or legitimate interest in the domain name; and,
further, the Respondent violated the Complainant’s
trademarks and is using the domain name in bad faith.
B. Respondent
The Respondent contends that the words "manhattan"
"office" and "space" are generic terms and
that the Complainant has failed to establish either fame or
secondary meaning associated with its name.
FINDINGS
The Complainant is a New York state licenced real estate
brokerage providing Tenant-only representation in the New York
City Metropolitan area. Since September, 1998, the Complainant
has continuously and exclusively transacted business as a
commercial real estate brokerage under the trade name
"Manhattan Office Space" and maintained a web site
by the same name.
By its own admission, Complainant registered the domain
names "manhattanoffices.net and manhattanoffices.org.,
both of which are not used to conduct business nor are any web
sites maintained under those names.
The Respondent is an on-line office leasing broker that
focuses on leasing office space in Manhattan. Their operation
is that of a discount office brokerage model, differentiating
their services from the full commission brokerage model, the
type of business model the Complainant is engaged in. As their
business models differ, they would not want to be associated
with the Complainant’s business "Manhattan Office
Space."
DISCUSSION
Paragraph 4(a) of the ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute
Policy ("Policy") requires that the complainant must
prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order
that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:
(1) the domain name registered by the Respondent is
identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service
mark in which the Complainant has rights;
(2) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in
respect of the domain name; and
(3) the domain name has been registered and is being used
in bad faith.
Identical and/or Confusingly Similar
The three words Manhattan, office and space are generic
terms used on a daily basis. No one firm is recognized as the
definitive broker for Manhattan office space. See
General Machine Products Co. v. Prime Domains,
FA 92531 (Nat. Arb. Forum) (finding
that the domain name is comprised of generic or descriptive
terms and therefore not transferring the domain name)
Rights or Legitimate Interests
As there are many firms whose business consists of leasing
office space in Manhattan, Respondent has a legitimate right
and/or interest in using generic terms in its domain name to
attract business. See EAuto,L.L.C. v. EAuto Parks, D200-0096
(WIPO Apr. 9, 2000) (finding that the Respondent has rights
and a legitimate interest in the domain name where the
Respondent has used the domain name to post information on its
business)
Registration and Use in Bad Faith
The Respondent launched this web site on April 10, 2000,
and operates exclusively in Manhattan at this time. By
contacting landlords and brokers individually through the use
of in-house research assistants, there are over 3,000 listings
of available office space in Manhattan on the Respondent’s
web site. The Respondent registered the domain name as a
possible avenue to attract business. The Respondent’s web
site seeks to involve and work with other brokers, and not to
limit competition. See
Goldmasters Precious Metals v. Gold Masters srl,
FA 95246 (Nat. Arb. Forum Aug 21, 2000) (finding
no bad faith where even though Respondent’s ownership and
purported use of the domain name frustrates Complainant’s
efforts, the record does not indicate any purpose or intent on
the part of the Respondent to prevent Complainant from
reflecting its mark in a corresponding domain name, to disrupt
the business of a competitor, or to intentionally attract the
customers of Complainant to Respondent’s site by creating a
likelihood of confusion).
DECISION
THE UNDERSIGNED DIRECTS THAT THE DOMAIN NAME
MANHATTAN-OFFICE-SPACE.COM BY RESPONDENT, CORSAIR GROUP/TENANTWISE.INC.
REMAIN WITH THE RESPONDENT.
Honorable Paul A. Dorf (Ret.)
Dated: October 11, 2000
|
|
