A World Intellectual Property Organization administrative panel has decided a case brought by Longines against a United States registrant, finding the disputed domain name confusingly similar to the LONGINES trademark, the respondent lacking legitimate rights, and bad faith present, and ordering transfer of the domain name.
In the domain name dispute heard by an administrative panel of the World Intellectual Property Organization Arbitration and Mediation Center, the complainant is the Swiss company Compagnie des Montres Longines, Francillon S.A. (Longines Watch Co. Francillon Ltd), the respondent is zoer zoer of the United States, and the registrar of the disputed domain name is TuringSign Inc.; the case number is D2026-4026 and the decision date is 2026 year 10 month 23 day.
The respondent did not submit any response, and the Center notified the parties of the respondent's default on 2026 year 10 month 7 day; on 2026 year 10 month 9 day the Center appointed Petra Pecar as the sole panelist in this case.
The disputed domain name was registered on 2026 year 3 month 27 day. The domain name had been used for a sales website impersonating the complainant, and at the time the complaint was filed it resolved to an inactive webpage.
The panel found that the disputed domain name fully reproduces the LONGINES trademark; although the added "watch" and "co" may affect the assessment of the second and third elements, for the purposes of the Policy they do not prevent a finding of confusing similarity. "watch" describes the complainant's products, "co" is a common abbreviation of "company", and together they imitate precisely the complainant's English company name.
The prior use was as follows: the website was labeled "Longines® Watches Official International Website - LONGINES", displayed the complainant's LONGINES logo, sold watches under the names of the complainant's various collections, and did not state that it had no relationship with the complainant.
The panel found that, because the website falsely presented itself as the complainant's official website, such use did not constitute a bona fide offering of goods within the meaning of Article 4(c)(i) of the Policy (WIPO Overview 3.1 Section 2.8.1), and the second element was established.
The Panel finds that, through the above use, the Respondent intended to attract Internet users for commercial gain, creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant's LONGINES trademark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of the website, falling within the circumstances of Paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. Although the domain name no longer resolved at the time of the Complaint, under the passive holding doctrine, combined with the composition of the domain name and the prior cybersquatting use, this does not affect the finding of bad faith.
Based on the foregoing reasons, the Panel, pursuant to Paragraph 4(i) of the Policy and Paragraph 15 of the Rules, orders that the disputed domain name <longineswatchco.com> be transferred to the Complainant.
Source: WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center Case D2026-4026, Sole Panelist Petra Pecar, 2026 year 10 month 23 day.
Note: The content of this article is compiled from public information and is only general intellectual property popularization and practical observation, for information reference only; it does not constitute legal advice or other professional advice for any specific case, and the relevant determinations and conclusions should be subject to the official published documents and the actual circumstances of the individual case.
Prepared by Liangma Legalmark Trademark Team from public industry information for general information only. It is not legal advice on a specific matter. Editorial standards ↗
← Back to news