According to Coolmath, the seven infringing domains, which all contained some variation of Coolmath’s trademark, along with generic terms such as “games” and “best”, were registered in bad faith.
It said the domains were registered to “intentionally confuse consumers” and “trade on [Coolmath’s] rights and reputation to drive traffic to its websites for its own commercial benefit”.
The original registrant did not reply to Coolmath’s complaint, other than to deny that “cool maths games” is a unique term.
Sole panellist Nicholas Smith said that the registrant was likely aware of Coolmath’s reputation and trademarks at the time of registration, evidencing bad faith. Alongside this, the websites mimic certain aspects of Coolmath’s websites. Three of the infringing domains featured the word “run”, which Smith said was a direct reference to the ‘Run’ and ‘Run 2’ games that are featured of Coolmath’s website. Smith also found that the domains were confusingly similar to the Coolmath trademark and that neither the minor variations or differences dispel “the overall impression that each of the domain names comprises of variants of the complainant’s Coolmath mark”.