In December, an arbitration panel in CIETAC, the subsidiary of ADNRDC in China, ruled Hangzhou Keluoma, an optical accessory retailer to transfer domain name to Chroma Technology Corp. (Chroma Tech), manufacture of world’s finest optical filter.


A panel of three tried the dispute according to UDRP (Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy) and decided is confusingly similar to trademark ”Chroma” which Chroma Tech owns in China and in countries around the world; Hangzhou Keluoma has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name and has registered and has been using the domain name in “bad faith”.


As an optical filter manufacture well known in the industry located in the United States, Chroma Tech had registered trademark “Chroma” on optical filters and accessories of microscopy equipment in China and worldwide and has been using the trademark in China from early 2000. It comes to Chroma Tech’s attention that Hanghzou Keluoma has registered domain name and has been selling chroma’s optical filters since 2016. Knowing that Hanghzou keluoma is not willing to transfer the domain name voluntarily, Chroma filed a complaint with CIETAC.


Mingdun prepared and submitted comprehensive evidence on Hangzhou Keluoma’s lacking rights and legitimate interests and “bad faith” in registering and using the domain name in dispute, as well as powerful rebuttal to Keluoma’s argument of good faith. Specifically, Mingdun argued Hangzhou Keluoma’s lacking rights and legitimate interests by submitting that “Chroma” is neither a phonetic translation of name of the company nor name of any board members; and argued “bad faith” by submitting evidence to show that “Chroma” has long been known in relevant field such as optical accessories and equipment and tightly connected with Chroma Tech whereas Hangzhou Keluoma has been using the “Chroma” trademark on the website linked to the domain name in dispute to attract desired internet traffic for financial gain.


Based on Mingdun’s allegations the panel ruled in favor of Chroma Tech on following rationales: 1) the essential portion of the domain name “Chroma-cn” is confusingly similar to Chroma Tech’s valid trademark “Chroma”; 2) Hangzhou Keluoma failed to proof it has rights or legitimate interests on the domain name; and 3) registration and use of the domain name is in “bad faith” because Chroma is not the phonetic translation of Hangzhou Keluoma and the domain name in dispute has been used to create likelihood of confusion and attract desired internet traffic for financial gain.


It is always important to proof bad faith in domain name disputes. Bad faith can be proofed from several aspects, create likelihood of confusion and attract desired internet traffic for financial gain can be good a choice if complainant is also doing business in the same intended market.


When resolving domain disputes, there are various approaches or courses of action that can be followed to get the registrant of a domain name to transfer it to you. The most suitable approach always depends on the specific circumstances of each domain.


Mingdun always considers the factual circumstances in the context of the applicable law. If you would like to know what is the best approach for the domain name you want, we can provide you with an opinion.



  • Related information More
  • 点击次数: 16
    2022 - 08 - 11
    For decades, some delivery companies, branches and their employees have committed illegal acts in terms of real-name mailing, incoming package inspection and implementation of the provisions on mailing of prohibited articles, in order to seek long-term stable business and high interests. Some express or logistics companies have conspired with the counterfeits production and sale gangs, forming a tight chain of interests. But they always got off lightly. A large amount of counterfeit drugs or illegal drugs were transported through express delivery. Case introduction Jin, a delivery man, knew that Yang was using a fake identity to sell fake medicines, but still helped Yang in packaging, receiving, delivering and mailing drug products and gained additional profit...
  • 点击次数: 13
    2022 - 07 - 08
    Public comments solicited on the draft amendments to the Measures for the Administration and Protection of Collective Marks and Certification Marks On 7 June 2022, the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) began to solicit public comments on the draft amendments to the Measures for the Administration and Protection of Collective Marks and Certification Marks.  The main modifications are as follows:1. Modify the name of the regulations to improve the legislative purpose2. Further standardize the registration application behavior3. Strengthen the management requirements of the registrant and the user4. Increase the registration of trademarks containing geographical names and the proper use of provisions5. Promote the use of trademarks to enhance public service...
  • 点击次数: 14
    2022 - 07 - 08
    SPC Update: Recently, the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) issued a notice on the Appellate Jurisdiction of Cases Involving Invention Patent and Other Intellectual Property Contract Disputes. In the notice, the SPC adjusted the jurisdiction of appellate cases of contract disputes related to IP right from the IP tribunal of the SPC to local provincial courts. For more information, click here. Link:  IP court Update: The IP tribunal of the Supreme People’s Court (SPC) published a new case analysis on identification of functions feature in Utility Model patent. The case clarifies that non-structural features in the description and drawings of a utility model patent, which are indispensable for realizing the functions and...
  • 点击次数: 2
    2020 - 04 - 15
    During the epidemic prevention and control period, the China national trademark office endeavors to facilitate the receipt and acceptance by improving the working model and refining service measures in order to actively assist enterprises to resume production. In the first quarter of 2020, the office have received a total of 22,000 trademark registration applications and 14,000 follow-up applications, and processed 95 recordation applications of trademark right pledge to help companies raise 2.979 billion Chinese yuan.
× WeChat official account
Beijing Mingdun Law Firm
Copyright 2008 - 2020 Beijing Mingdun Law FirmRhino Cloud Provides Enterprise Cloud Services