Accelerated Proceeding

WIPO Case No. DSE2025-0012

ARBITRATION

AND

MEDIATION CENTER

Alternative Dispute Resolution Proceeding

Accelerated Proceeding

Case No. DSE2025-0012

1. Petitioner

The Petitioner is LichtBlick SE (Lightblick), Germany, represented by White & Case LLP, Germany.

2. Domain Holder

The Domain Holder is [Name Removed], Georgia.

3. Domain Name and Procedural History

This Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding relates to the domain name <lichtblick.se> (“Domain Name”).

This Petition was filed under the Terms and Conditions of registration (the “.se Policy”) and the Instructions governing Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding for domain names in the top-level domain .se (the “.se Rules”).

The WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (“the Center”) verified that the Petition satisfied the formal requirements of the .se Policy and the .se Rules. In accordance with Section 13 of the .se Rules, the Center formally notified the Domain Holder of the Petition on April 9, 2025. The Domain Holder did not submit any response and, accordingly, the Center notified the Domain Holder's default on May 14, 2025.

The Center appointed Peter Hedberg as the sole Arbitrator in this matter on May 20, 2025. The Arbitrator has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with Section 1 of the .se Rules.

4. Factual Background

The Petitioner is a German electricity provider and it is the registered holder of the International trademark registrations Nos. 1027851, LichtBlick – die Zukunft der Energie (word) and 1330493, LichtBlick (word) both designating the European Union.

page 2

5. Claim

The Petitioner has requested that the Domain Name be transferred to the Petitioner.

6. Parties’ Contentions

A. Petitioner

The Petitioner is the owner of the International Trademark Registration No. 1027851 for the word mark
“LichtBlick – die Zukunft der Energie,” designated in the European Union on December 15, 2009. The
Petitioner is also the owner of International Trademark Registration No. 1330493 for the word mark
“LichtBlick,” designated in the European Union on March 23, 2016. As these trademarks are protected within
the EU, they are legally recognized in Sweden.

The Petitioner is one of the five largest German electricity providers, and the Domain Name exploits the Petitioner’s registered name to profit from advertising links. By placing advertising links on the domain, the Domain Holder seeks to monetize the resulting traffic. In addition, the Domain Holder is taking advantage of the fact that the Petitioner is a Societas Europaea (“SE”), which can cause customers to mistakenly enter “Lichtblick.se” when trying to reach the Petitioner’s website (“lichtblick.de”). The advertising links relate

directly to the Petitioner’s business activities, namely electrical energy and electricity supply. The screenshot
attached as Annex 3, dated February 24, 2025, shows advertising links for “Günstiger Strom” (“cheap
electricity”), “Lichtblick Strom” (“Lichtblick electricity”), and “Stromanbieter Preisvergleich” (“electricity
provider price comparison”). The Domain Name was registered and is used in bad faith.

There is no evidence that the Domain Holder possesses a justified interest in using the Domain Name. The fact that the Domain Holder employs the domain solely to capitalize on the Petitioner’s protected name and derive financial gain already contradicts such an interest.

B. Domain Holder

The Domain Holder has not submitted any response.

7. Discussion and Findings

A. The Domain Name is identical or similar to a name which is legally recognized in Sweden and to which the Petitioner can prove its rights

The Petitioner is the registered holder of the International trademark registrations Nos. 1027851, LichtBlick – die Zukunft der Energie (word) and 1330493, LichtBlick (word) both designating the European Union, thus legally recognized in Sweden. The element “LichtBlick” is identical in said trademarks and the Domain Name, hence the Arbitrator finds that the Petition fulfills this requirement in 7.2 of the .se Policy.

B. The Domain Name has been registered or used in bad faith

When determining whether a domain name has been registered or used in bad faith, all relevant circumstances are assessed. It is sufficient that bad faith can be proven to exist either in connection with registration or with the use of the domain name for the condition to be fulfilled.

According to the Petitioner the Domain Holder has registered and used the Domain Name in bad faith in order to exploit the Petitioner’s name to monetize the resulting traffic. As the Domain Holder has not filed any response to the Petition there is no information or explanation to this fact, nor anything else which could clarify why this information is available on the website under the Domain Name. In these circumstances the Arbitrator finds that the Domain Name has been registered and used in bad faith.

page 3

C. The Domain Holder has no rights or justified interest in the Domain Name.

As there is no response from the Domain Holder on the Petition there is no explanation or justification as to why the Doman Holder would have a right to the Domain Name. Hence the Arbitrator finds that the Domain Holder has no right or justified interest in the Domain Name.

8. Decision

The Petition is well founded, and the Domain Name shall be transferred to the Petitioner.

Peter Hedberg
Date: May 30, 2025