OZIUM vs. Impersonation: A Trademark Battle

The manufacturer of air sanitizing and deodorizing products, OZIUM, found itself in a battle to preserve its reputation and trademark rights. With OZIUM’s long history and extensive trademark registrations, this case served as a stark reminder of the perils of online impersonation.


OZIUM, a company founded way back in 1945, has been a renowned name in the air sanitizing industry. The company has successfully built its brand around the trademark “OZIUM,” with registrations not only in the United States but also in various countries worldwide, including China, Canada, Australia, Mexico, and the European Union. OZIUM primarily promotes its products through its official website, <ozium.com>, while selling them through authorized retail giants like Amazon, Walmart, and Target. The Complainant has invested significant resources in promoting its trademark, and as a result, it has gained substantial goodwill and public recognition over the years.

Key Facts:

  1. OZIUM’s trademark, “OZIUM,” is registered with the USPTO since June 12, 1990.
  2. The disputed domain name, <oziumus.com>, was registered on June 7, 2023, and was alleged to be used for impersonation and selling products at heavily discounted prices.
  3. The Respondent, in this case, failed to submit a response to the allegations.

Panel’s Decision:

The Panel’s decision hinged on several key factors:

  1. Trademark Ownership: OZIUM presented evidence of trademark ownership, including USPTO registrations. While there was a discrepancy in the ownership details, the Panel confirmed OZIUM’s rights in the mark.
  1. Impersonation and Infringement: Screenshots of the disputed website showed blatant impersonation, with the use of OZIUM’s graphic logo and product images. This led the Panel to conclude that the Respondent was directly infringing OZIUM’s trademarks.
  1. Bad Faith Use: The Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name disrupted OZIUM’s business and led users to a website causing confusion with the OZIUM trademark, constituting bad faith.
  1. Trademark Reputation: OZIUM’s evidence of its trademark’s reputation, though not comprehensive, demonstrated the mark’s goodwill, further supporting their case.


This case underscores the importance of protecting trademarks in the digital realm. OZIUM’s long history and extensive trademark registrations served as a foundation for a successful defense against impersonation and infringement. The Panel’s decision to transfer the disputed domain name back to OZIUM ensures the company can continue to protect its brand integrity and reputation.

In an age where online impersonation and infringement are on the rise, this case serves as a valuable lesson for companies to safeguard their trademarks and maintain the trust of their customers. The Panel’s ruling reiterates that established brands have a right to defend their reputation against those who seek to profit through deception.

Read the full case here: https://www.adrforum.com/domaindecisions/2054196.htm


  1. Gurbani Avatar

    This fraudulent impersonation has rather become common and grave. Measures must be taken to shun all such activities to make sure that trademark companies dont face this regularly.

Join the Discussion

Discover more from Domain Magazine

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Verified by ExactMetrics