The Czech Arbitration Court recently ruled in favour of the EUIPO in a UDRP proceeding concerning the domain name euipp.com.

In the typosquatting case, the Panel found it was the respondent's intention to deceive and divert consumers, as evidenced by their dissemination of scam emails.

The respondent, Mark Traded, sought to take advantage of the EUIPO's goodwill and credibility, luring internet users into using services that may appear to be affiliated with the Office.

The panel acknowledged EUIPO’s reputation and the widespread recognition of the EUIPO mark, which is itself registered as an EU trade mark and as an international mark.

The respondent did not file an effective response to the complaint.

The panel concluded that: the disputed domain name was confusingly similar to EUIPO’s trade mark; the respondent had no right or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name; and it had registered and was using the disputed domain name in bad faith.

In a post on its website, EUIPO stated: “This is the first time the Office has successfully relied on its registered EUTM in a domain name dispute resolution process. The ruling demonstrates how IP rights provide tangible enforcement benefits in holding scammers accountable for misleading consumers.”

As part of its Strategic Plan 2030, the EUIPO has intensified efforts to tackle fraudulent activities.

EUIPO has also secured criminal court rulings in Sweden and Germany in cases involving scams.

For more information on misleading payment requests, view the dedicated webpage on EUIPO’s website or speak to a member of the MARQUES Anti-Fraud task Force.