Thu 6. Feb 2025, 14:36
The owner of the rights to the Asterix books failed in a dispute over 16 domains because it did not pay the necessary attention to the details of its presentation and the evidence of its own claims in the URS proceedings.
Les Editions Albert René holds all rights to the Asterix books and all other joint works by Albert Uderzo and René Goscinny. It considers that its rights to the trademark “TOUTATIS PARC ASTERIX”, registered on April 15, 2022, have been infringed by a total of 16 domains under various endings containing the term “parcasterix” (e.g. fr-parcasterix.online, fr-parcasterix.fun and parca-sterix.fun). Les Editions Albert René announces the opening of an amusement park called “parc Asterix Paris” under the domain parcasterix.fr. The 16 domains are all registered through Hosting Ukraine LLC Privacy Protection and redirect to websites advertising an amusement park called “ParcAsterixs”. Les Editions Albert René initiated Uniform Rapid Suspension (URS) proceedings before The Forum and requested the suspension of the 16 domains for the duration of the current registration period. The opposing party did not respond to the matter. Attorney Peter Müller (pm.legal) from Munich was appointed as the decision-maker.
Müller had to reject the URS complaint as the complainant did not meet the requirements for a “clear cut case” (Forum Claim Number: FA2501002134273). In a URS proceeding, even if the opposing party does not respond on the merits, the complainant must establish a prima facie case for each of the three elements of the proceeding in order to obtain an order to block a domain. He must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the domain is similar or identical to his own trademark, that the opponent has no right or legitimate interest in the domain and that he has registered and is using the domain in bad faith.
The proceedings already failed on the issue of trademark law. In the present case, Müller established that the complainant is not identical to the owner of the registered trademark “Les Editions Albert Rene SRL”. The complainant also did not provide any evidence of the use of the “TOUTATIS PARC ASTERIX” trademark, but only screenshots of a website showing a logo with the words “parc Asterix Paris”. Furthermore, it did not prove that the trademark was registered earlier than the 16 domains or provide any information on the registration dates of the domains. Müller did not need to examine the prima facie evidence regarding the opponent's right or legitimate interest in the domains and regarding the bad faith registration of the domains and their use, as this was no longer relevant. Since the URS is not intended for proceedings with open questions of fact, but only for clear cases of trademark misuse, Müller found that the complainant had not fulfilled the three elements of the URS procedure. Thus, he dismissed the URS complaint.
Once again, it can be seen that the simple and quick URS procedure is by no means to be taken lightly. The requirement to present simple and concise arguments and clear evidence is high. And like other large companies and groups in the past, Les Editions Albert René also failed here because of the simple little things.
The URS decision on the domains parcasterix.fun and others can be found at:
https://www.adrforum.com/DomainDecisions/2134273D.htm