Domain Name Clean-up

Since 1980, Complainant has owned and used the service mark "Merry Maids" for use in connection with commercial and residential cleaning services.  It registered the domain name "merrymaids.com" in 1994 to direct Internet users to a commercial website promoting its services and those of its franchisees.

Complainant found it dirty pool when Respondent, Mary's Maid to Order, registered the domain name "marysmaids.com" for usage with a web portal homepage providing a  search function and listing a variety of cleaning related services, including "Maid Service", "Merry Maid Cleaning" and others.

Arguing that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its service mark, Complainant alleged that Respondent was using a "homonym to capitalize on Complainants' marks".

Denying the Complaint, the Panel made its determination based upon factors typically assessed in a trademark infringement proceeding, taking into account unique features of the Internet.  In so doing, the Panel noted that Complainant's "Merry Maids" service mark is synonymous with a "happy cleaning service provider", formed by common, highly descriptive terms and constituting a "weak" service mark.  Since "maids" is a generic term for cleaning service providers, the Panel held that Complainant's mark must be compared for confusing similarity on the basis of the adjectival term "merry" and the possessive term used in the disputed domain name, "marys".  Holding that the terms were not confusingly similar, the Panel observed in detail the different visual impression and sound between the terms (including one "r" versus two; and the difference in vowels), as well as the difference in meaning between "merry" (synonymous with happy) and "Mary" (a given name).

Of particular note in the Panel's denial of the Complaint, the Panel rejected Complainant's argument that a common typographical error may result in Internet users being taken to Respondent's, not Complainant's, website.  While keyboard users can mis-type almost anything, the Panel was doubtful that "marysmaids.com" could be inadvertently typed for "merrymaids" and that the mere possibility of such mis-typing was not enough to give Complainant' more extensive rights in its mark. In the Panel's opinion, to give Complainant rights in "marysmaids.com" would be substantially expanding Complainant's dominion over the universe of "-maids" combination terms, which the Panel was disinclined to do.

Merry Maids, Inc., ServiceMaster Brands, L.L.C. v. Mary's Maid to Order, WIPO Case No. D2007-1283