national arbitration forum



Facebook Inc. v.  Radoslav

Claim Number: FA1308001515825






Complainant:  Facebook Inc. of Menlo Park, California, United States of America.

Complainant Representative: 

Complainant Representative: Hogan Lovells (Paris) LLP of Paris, France.


Respondent:  Radoslav of Presov, California, SK.

Respondent Representative:  




Registrars:  Dynadot, LLC



The undersigned certifies that he has acted independently and impartially and to the best of his knowledge has no known conflict in serving as the Examiner in this proceeding.


Darryl C. Wilson, as Examiner.



Complainant submitted: August 21, 2013

Commencement: September 11, 2013   

Default Date: September 26, 2013


Having reviewed the communications records, the Examiner finds that the National Arbitration Forum has discharged its responsibility under URS Procedure Paragraphs 3 and 4 and Rule 4 of the Rules for the Uniform Rapid Suspension System (the "Rules") .



Complainant requests that the domain name be suspended for the life of the registration.



Clear and convincing evidence.




Complainant is Facebook Inc. which lists its address as Menlo Park, CA, USA. Complainant states that since it began doing business in 2004 it has become the world’s leading provider of online social networking services with more than 1.11 billion registered users around the world. Complainant also asserts that “it is ranked as the first most visited website in the world, and has the second highest traffic in Slovakia (where the Respondent is based).” Complainant owns numerous domestic and international registrations for its FACEBOOK mark including; FACEBOOK - Community Trade Mark No. 006455687 registered on 07 October 2008.


Complainant contends that Respondent’s domain name, <>, is confusingly similar to its FACEBOOK mark, and was registered and is being used in bad faith by the Respondent who has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name.


Respondent is Radoslav Stach whose address is listed as Presnov, Slovakia. Respondent registered the disputed domain name on or about March 26, 2013. Respondent did not provide a response to the Complaint in accordance with the URS rules of procedure; however Respondent did provide correspondence which stated,

“Im was offline, could you pleas tell me what I have doing ? I want removed this domain from my account!”



The only difference between the Domain Name, <>, and the Complainant's FACEBOOK mark is the absence of one letter ("o") in the Domain Name. In addition, it is well accepted that the top level domain is irrelevant in assessing identity or confusing similarity, thus the “.pw” is of no consequence here. The Examiner finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s FACEBOOK mark.



To the best of the Complainant’s knowledge, the Respondent does not have any rights in the name FACEBOOK or “facebok” nor is the Respondent commonly known by either name. Complainant has not authorized Respondent’s use of its mark and has no affiliation with Respondent. The Domain Name points to a web page listing links for popular search topics which Respondent appears to use to generate click through fees for Respondent’s personal financial gain. Such use does not constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services and wrongfully misappropriates Complainant’s mark’s goodwill. The Examiner finds that the Respondent has established no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name.




The Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith.

The Domain Name was registered on or about March 26, 2013, nine years after the Complainant's FACEBOOK marks were first used and began gaining global notoriety.

The Examiner finds that the Respondent has engaged in a pattern of illegitimate domain name registrations (See Complainant’s exhibit URS Site Screenshot) whereby Respondent has either altered letters in, or added new letters to, well-known trademarks. Such behavior supports a conclusion of Respondent's bad faith registration and use. Furthermore, the Complainant submits that the Respondent is using the Domain Name in order to attract for commercial gain Internet users to its parking website by creating a likelihood of confusion as to the source, sponsorship or affiliation of the website. The Examiner finds such behavior to further evidence Respondent’s bad faith registration and use.



After reviewing the Complainant’s submissions, the Examiner determines that

the Complainant has demonstrated all three elements of the URS by a standard of clear and convincing evidence; the Examiner hereby Orders the following domain names be SUSPENDED for the duration of the registration.





     Darryl C. Wilson, Examiner

Dated:  September 27, 2013




Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.

Click Here to return to our Home Page