Christian Dior v. Mumbai Domains

---

In 2004 a company named “Mumbai Domains” of Mumbai Maharashtra, India purchased the domain name “wwwdior.com.” In 2010 Christian Dior, owner of the trademark “Dior” and the domain name www.dior.com/en_us among other domain names, filed a UDRP complaint against Mumbai Domains to take control of the domain name. At the date of the UDRP filing the disputed domain name resolved to a website with links to several websites for products such as handbags, women’s clothing, women’s shoes, and similarly situated apparel.

This case is heavily cited in UDRP decisions as an example of typosquatting, which is usually considered on its face to be proof of a bad faith domain name registration. Since Christian Dior’s website and the disputed website were identical with the exception of a single period after the "www", the panelist quickly found that the domain name was identical or confusingly similar to Christian Dior’s registered trademark. The egregious nature of typosquatting also satisfied the second UDRP element because Mumbai Domains was not able to show any legitimate interest to the domain name outside of trading off of the good will of the Christian Dior brand name. 

In discussing the element of bad faith use and registration, the panelist also quickly concluded that the confusingly similar nature of the domain name, when compared to the Christian Dior website, showed bad faith. This confusing similarity mixed with the fact that the website was populated with links to sites that sell that same kinds of products as Christian Dior was enough evidence to show that the website was only operating to trade off of Christian Dior’s good will as a brand. On February 3, 2011 the panelist ruled in favor of Christian Dior and transferred the domain name to them.