The Fourth Department determined plaintiff had stated causes of action for unfair competition and cybersquatting by using domain names similar to plaintiff’s:
… [D[efendants … operate a website accessed at idealyou.com. In 2016, … plaintiff…, established a competing business that operates a website accessed at idealbuff.com. …
… [O]n the day plaintiff opened her business, defendants purchased two domain names, idealbuf.com and idealbuffalo.com, and redirected all web traffic from those addresses to idealyou.com. …
… As relevant to the cause of action for unfair competition, the statute prohibits using “any word, term, name, symbol, or device . . . or any false designation of origin . . . which . . . is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection, or association . . . as to the origin, sponsorship, or approval of . . . goods, services, or commercial activities by another person” … . We agree with plaintiff that, accepting the allegations in the third-party complaint as true … defendants’ use of the idealbuf.com and idealbuffalo.com domain names could be misleading and thus constitute unfair competition under the statute … . …
“To successfully assert a claim [for cybersquatting], a plaintiff must demonstrate that[:] (1) its marks were distinctive at the time the domain name was registered; (2) the infringing domain names complained of are identical to or confusingly similar to the plaintiff’s mark; and (3) that the defendant has a bad faith intent to profit from that mark” … . The Ideal You Weight Loss Ctr., LLC v Zillioux, 2019 NY Slip Op 05900, Fourth Dept 7-31-19