Version: 30102003
Editor: Franka Pals
Publisher: Novamedia
Disclaimer: Novamedia disclaims all liability for information provided within the ”Novamedia European Gaming and Lottery Files”.The information is supplied by independent journalistic sources. No parts of these files may be reproduced in any form by print, photo print, microfilm or otherwise, or re-distributed electronically in any form without written permission from the publisher.
The Principality is a constitutional monarchy and since May 9th, 1949, reigned by Prince Rainier III. For seven centuries the Grimaldi family has presided over the Principality of Monaco, one of the longest ruling families in Europe. The beginning of the rule by the House of Grimaldi started from 1419.
The Principality is a hereditary and constitutional monarchy which gives the Prince the highest authority and which guarantees separation of power.
Executive power is retained by the highest authority, the Prince. Administrative responsibilities are the duties of the Minister of State, aided by the Government Council responsible to the Prince. Legislative and budgetary powers are exercised jointly by the Prince and by the National Council.
Monaco is an independent and sovereign state bordering the Mediterranean sea and Cap d'Ail, La Turbie , Beausoleil and Roquebrune Cap-Martin; communities in the French Department of the Alpes-Maritimes.
The area is only 1.95 sq km and the secondsmallest independent state in the world (after the Holy See) and is almost entirely urban. Nearly 40 hectors were reclaimed from the sea during the last 20 years. The territory extends like a strip along the shore, occasionally rising almost vertically to an elevation of 163 meters. The width of the borders range from 1,050 meters to 350 meters and the shoreline measures 4,100 meters .
The Principality is comprised on one municipality, Monaco, with four quarters.
The 'town' has the following separate areas:
Even the new Euro got its own Monegasque coins and notes. One side of the coins is common to all countries. National symbols are depicted on the reverse side (Grimaldi coat of arms, Grimaldi seal on the coins and on , Double effigy of H.S.H Prince Rainier III and H.S.H. the Crown Prince Albert and Effigy of H.S.H. Prince Rainier III).
All these coins are legal tender throughout all countries in the Euro zone.
Vice-versa, coins from other countries shall be legal tender in the Principality of Monaco.
The Euro zone 15 member countries are France, Germany, Austria, Belgium, Spain, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, The Netherlands and Portugal. The small countries such as Monaco, San Marino and Vatican have also adopted the Euro.
Monaco is a favourite country for rich people and well known tennis players.
With over 40 banking establishments, 70 windows, 5 representative offices and 8 financial companies, the banking sector constitutes a large part of Monaco's financial activity. Deposits into Monegasque accounts exceed 15 billion Euro and half come from non-residents.
The Monegasque government actively combats money-laundering and numbered bank accounts are illegal. However, bank confidentiality is one of the main principals of Monegasque banking.
The banking establishments are not only capable of managing international assets, but also offer comprehensive services to companies in the Principality (including helping companies to obtain financial resources from a special government fund!).
More than half of the investment in Monaco are made by non-residents who plan to live in Monaco only temporarily French nationals wishing to take advantage of the inheritance tax laws are a significant part of this population.
The Principality of Monaco has a diversified economy. Because of its location and its unique fiscal environment, service sector activities and value-added industries are the most representative in the economy of Monaco.
The practice of a commercial, craft or industrial activity or a service sector activity requires an authorization from the Royal government. The authorization is granted or refused according to the guarantees furnished by the applicant and the interest that the project presents for the economy of Monaco.
In order to encourage the creation of companies and to develop the scientific and technical research sector, the Royal government offers certain fiscal advantages. In fact, these firms are eligible for tax breaks. A tax credit of up to 10 million Euro may be granted. All firms created in the Principality and subject to the company tax on profits are exempted from tax for the first two years and partly exempted for the third year. Already from 1869 all forms of direct taxation were abolished.
On July 18th, 1943 the famous cross-border radio station 'Radio Monte Carlo', RMC, was set up as a joint French, Monegasque, German and Italian venture and went on air for the first time, with Maurice Chevalier hosting the inaugural programme which included songs by Bing Crosby.
Now this multilingual radiobroadcaster is very well known by its scoops and journalistic approach in the Arab and Middle Eastern countries, which lead in 1972 of the establishing of 'Radio Monte Carlo Moyen Orient'. The RMC-MO team is made up of over 80 journalists, reporters and correspondents covering the entire world, and a dozen presenters. Their broadcasts are followed by 15 million listeners throughout the Middle East and the Gulf States. Also via Internet!
Monaco is further more well known by the death of Princess Grace in a tragic car accident on 14 September 1982, the International Circus Festival, the International Television Festival, its Oceanographic Institute, its football team and the Formula-1 races. Already in 1891 there existed an Automobile Club of Monaco and in 1929 the first Automobile Grand Prix of Monaco was organised.
he Principality was admitted into the United Nations on May 28th, 1993.
| Population: | 32,130 (July 2003 est.) |
|---|---|
| Age Structure | 0-14 years: 15.5% (male 2,551; female 2,445) |
| Currency: | EURO (EUR) The introduction of the Euro into the Principality as bank money was designed to be a measure to guarantee currency continuity once the Franc, legal currency since 1925, has been phased out. |
| GPD | purchasing power parity - $870 million (1999 est.) GDP - per capita: purchasing power parity - $27,000 (1999 est.) (* Source: CIA.) |
| Telecom | Monaco Télécom is cooperating with French Vivendi for Internet, mobiles and Cable TV activities. GPRS (Global Packet Radio Services) will
|
Legislative branch exists of an unicameral National Council or Conseil National (24 seats; 16 members elected by list majority system, 8 by proportional representation; to serve five-year terms).
Judicial branch exists of the Supreme Court or Tribunal Supreme (judges appointed by the monarch on the basis of nominations by the National Council).
Since the coming of age has dropped from 21 to 18 in the Principality, entrance to the gaming rooms is now permitted to people over 18. Official identification will be asked for at the entrance.
Since 1863, the Société des Bains de Mer (SBM) has the monopoly on gaming in the Principauté de Monaco.
Precluding on the arrival of an online casino in Monaco, SBM is -finally- trying to protect its trademark and domain name. Looking on the Internet one would be amazed how many world wide sites and casinos are carrying the name of: Monaco Casino, Casino Monaco, Monte-Carlo Casino, etc. The verdict of the United States Court of Appeals, is described here underneath.
Protection of Non-U.S. Trademarks under U.S. Law* (July 21, 2003)
In a split decision, a United States Court of Appeals recently held that a non-U.S. company's use of a non-U.S. trademark in advertising conducted in the United States is enough to afford it trademark protection in the United States, even though the advertised services are rendered only outside the United States. The dissenting judge calls this an "unprecedented conclusion that an entity's use of a foreign trademark solely to sell services in a foreign country entitles it to trademark protection under United States law, even though the foreign mark holder has never used or registered its mark in the United States."
Under U.S. trademark law, a party has a protectible interest in an unregistered trademark if it can show that the mark is both "used in commerce" and distinctive. In International Bancorp, LLC, et al. v. Societe des Bains de Mer et du Cercle des Etrangers a Monaco, (May 19, 2003), a divided panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that the "use in commerce" requirement for trademark protection could be met by a non-U.S. company that owns and operates resort and casino facilities outside the United States, because of the combination of that company's extensive advertising of its services in the United States and its sale of those services to U.S. citizens - even if those services are provided in another country.
As described in International Bancorp, Societe des Bains de Mer et du Cercle des Etrangers a Monaco (SBM) is the owner of the historic Casino de Monte Carlo in Monaco. Wealthy individuals from all over the world, including the United States, visit and gamble there. SBM maintains a small office in New York that is responsible for promotional activities in the United States, and expends $1 million annually in the United States on trade shows, advertising campaigns, charity partnerships, direct mail solicitations, telephone marketing, and solicitation of media coverage. SBM owns a valid registration for the "Casino de Monte Carlo" trademark in Monaco, but not in the United States.
SBM learned that numerous websites devoted to online gambling utilized domain names which incorporated the term "Casino de Monte Carlo" and displayed pictures and renderings of the exterior and interior of its casino. According to the majority opinion in International Bancorp, these features implied that International Bancorp and other web site operators were affiliated with SBM's Casino de Monte Carlo.
SBM filed a complaint with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), a United Nations agency that is authorized to administer proceedings for resolving international domain name disputes. A WIPO panel ruled in favour of SBM and ordered the transfer of the various domain names to SBM. In order to forestall loss of the domain names, International Bancorp and the other website operators filed suit in U.S. federal court. The district court found in favour of SBM, and held that SBM did sell services in the Unites States through its New York office. International Bancorp and the other web site operators appealed, contending primarily that SBM had failed to establish the required "use in commerce" of the "Casino de Monte Carlo" mark.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed, though on different grounds. The appeals court concluded that SBM's New York office did not sell or render any services in the United States, but concluded that it did not matter. The majority interpreted the term "commerce" as including commerce between citizens of the United States and those of another country. Based on this definition, the majority concluded that SBM's activities constituted "use in commerce" because, in addition to advertising the "Casino de Monte Carlo" mark in the United States, SBM sold casino services to United States citizens. According to the majority, the fact that these services were rendered outside the United States is irrelevant.
The dissent notes that until today, every court to address this issue has held that use of a foreign trademark in connection with goods and services sold only in a foreign country by a foreign entity does not constitute 'use of the mark' in United States commerce sufficient to merit protection" under U.S. law. The majority decision therefore puts the Fourth Circuit at odds with others who have considered this issue, including the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Of more interest, the decision in International Bancorp does not appear to have been persuasive to a different panel of the same court (including the dissenting judge in International Bancorp) in another case decided by the Fourth Circuit less than a month later, Barcelona.com, Inc. v. Excelentismo Ayuntamiento de Barcelona, (June 2, 2003). In Barcelona.com, the court referred to the "fundamental doctrine of territoriality upon which our trademark law is presently based," and held, albeit in a somewhat different context, that "United States courts do not entertain actions seeking to enforce trademark rights that exist only under foreign law." Of course, under a broad view of International Bancorp, any non-U.S. trademark owner that advertises its goods or services in the U.S. but sells them abroad may actually have trademark rights under U.S. law.
Banking on a broad reading of the International Bancorp case may, however, be playing a game of Russian roulette - the court in that case seemed focused on the long and extensive advertising in the United States of SBM's casino. Non-U.S. trademark owners with minimal advertising in the United States who occasionally sell goods or services to U.S. companies or citizens outside the United States may not see the same result. But in attempting to enforce their non-U.S. trademarks in the U.S., they do have a new card to play.
* Source: Hale and Dorr llp, authors: Mark Matuschak and Vinita Ferrera
History
When history led the Principality to financial problems toward the end of the 1800's, Prince Charles, ruler of Monaco at the time, decided to bring gambling and roulette to Monaco.
By that time gambling was outlawed in Germany and the inventor of the single zero machine, François Blanc, was a highly successful casino operator in Germany and when he heard of the Monte Carlo project he was very intrigued and came to Monaco. In 1863 Blanc signed a 50-year franchise contract and built the luxurious Monte Carlo casino.
When the railway line from Nice to Menton was inaugurated in 1868, travellers and players could even come by train to Monaco. And that connection came for the Casino at a very desirable moment. In the meantime travellers and players can come to Monaco with the TGV!
The casino set the standards for roulette in Europe, and roulette remained exclusive to Monte Carlo until 1933. This led to the gambling and resort industry in Monaco as many of Europe's rich were attracted to the luxurious Monte Carlo casino.
During the World War 2, Monaco became the regular destination of Nazi officers, who used local banks to launder their dubiously acquired funds and relaxed at the gamingtables where business boomed as never before. The formal "occupation" of Monaco by the Germans only lasted for 26 weeks from February 14th, 1944. Before then the Principality was "neutral".
Slot machines were established in Monaco well before they were introduced in France, which was only in 1985.
Website: www.sbm.mc
The Company running the casino in Monaco is the Société des Bains de Mer, SBM , (Premier Marché d'Euronext Paris S.A:
Code Reuters BAIN.PA) is a long established (1863) owning and management company, operating the Casino de Monte Carlo, the Café de Paris and the Sun Casino, l'Hôtel de Paris, l'Hôtel Hermitage, the Monte Carlo Beach Hotel, the Centre des Thermes Marins (Spa) and the Monte-Carlo Sporting Club.
The majority of the revenue of the company is generated by the four casinos, four hotels, 24 restaurants and a large amount of real estate including all of the luxury shops around the Casino square. Above that SBM manages the Opera and the Monte Carlo Sporting Club where major stars from around the world perform during the summer season. Furthermore there is an award-winning Spa, golf course and one of the most beautiful tennis club's in the world where the ATP tournament is played.
Famous the world over, the Casino's fabulous history was linked from the very beginning with that of the Belle Époque. Its foundations were laid in 1861, in the reign of Charles III, on the isolated plateau of the Spélugues, which was to become, five years later, the new town of Monte Carlo.
The main building is connected on its left (when seen from the front) to a series of other buildings which house the gaming rooms which are open every day (except 1st May) from midday onwards.
The shareholders are:
Contrary to the trends in Europe the Casino in Monaco produces 75% of the revenue coming from the traditional games (Chemin de Fer, craps, blackjack and roulette, etc.) and the slot machines contribute only 25%. Number of slot machines: 1,254.
The Group's number of employees: 3,021 (31/3/2001) and 3,034 (31/3/2002).
| Year | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sales* | 320 | 298.6 | 326 | 307 | 305 |
| Net Result * | n/a | 20.9 | 29.5 | 23.9 | 19 |
| * in million(s) in Euro | |||||
Profit per Share |
n/a |
11.63 | 16.39 | 13.28 | n/a |
Sales by activity: Chiffre d'affaires par activité
Europe's most mystical gaming jurisdiction is about to enter the Internet space.
Software supplier Boss Media issued a news release on January 20th, 2003, announcing it had been chosen by Societe des Bains de Mer (SBM), a land-based casino in Monte Carlo, to develop an online gaming system for Casino Monte Carlo.
Boss Media CEO Peter Bertilsson said if all goes according to plan the Web site could be up in running by late winter or early spring of this year.
The venture will be SBM's first experience with interactive gambling as well as the first authorized Internet gambling service in Monte Carlo.
Regulations in Monte Carlo don't currently allow for Internet-based gambling, although Bertilsson is confident the necessary changes will be made before the scheduled launch of the site.
"The government owns the casino and sets its own rules," Bertilsson said. "I don't think the lack of Internet regulations are going to be an issue."
Bertilsson added, "Monte Carlo is the best brand name in the world for high rollers. I can't really say much, but you can speculate on what type of customers will be in their database."
Monte Carlo has long been the subject of film and lure after becoming a destination for many of the world's richest and most elite gamblers.
Naturally, Boss and SBM will use the mystique of Monte Carlo to their advantage in developing the site.
"We probably won't get James Bond, but I think we might get awfully close," Bertilsson said.
For Boss, Bertilsson said, the partnership with Casino Monte Carlo is a huge step in the company's shift from providing software to relatively small operators to designing customized sites for land-based gaming entities.
So, it is not a big surprise that 'already' in 1999 SBM was fighting for its domain name 'monaco-casino.com' and asked arbitration. And the Administrative Panel Decision of the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center, is published underneath at the full:
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
La Société Anonyme des Bains de Mer et du Cercle des Etrangers à Monaco v. Netrider
Case No. D2000-1330
Complainant is the S.A. La Société Des Bains de Mer et Du Cercle Des Etrangers à Monaco, having its registered office at Place du Casino, Monte Carlo, MC 98000 Monaco, Principauté de Monaco. Complainant is represented by Société d'avocats August & Debouzy, Attorneys, having their principal place of business at 6 avenue de Messine, 75008 Paris, France (hereinafter referred to as "Complainant").
Respondent is Netrider with a declared address at 6 avenue d'Alery, 74000 Annecy, France (hereinafter referred to as "Respondent").
The domain name at issue is: "monacocasino.com" (hereinafter referred to as "the Domain Name").
The registrar of the Domain Name at issue is Network Solutions Inc. (NSI), 505 Huntmar Park Drive, Herndon, VA 20170, USA (hereinafter referred to as "Registrar").
3. Procedural History
On November 28, 2000 after having receiving Benoit Van Asbroeck?s completed and signed statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the "Center") transmitted to the parties a Notifica tion of Appointment of Administrative Panel.
The procedural history prior to the appointment of the Administrative Panel can be summarised as follows:
On October 4, 2000 the Center received a copy of the Complaint from Complainant via email and on October 5, 2000 the Center received the hardcopy of the Complaint. On October 9, the Center sent an Acknowledgment of Receipt of Complaint to Complainant. The Complainant paid the required fee.
The Center verified that the Complaint satisfies the formal requirements of the ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy"), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules"), and the Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Supplemental Rules").
On October 25, 2000 the Center sent a Notification of Complaint and Commencement of Administrative Proceeding to the Respondent together with copies of the Complaint, with a copy to the Complainant.
Notwithstanding due notification to Respondent of the Complaint including Complainant's file, Respondent did not submit any response. Accordingly on November 15, 2000 the Center advised Respondent that it was in default for failing to file its Response.
The language of the administrative proceeding is English, being the language of the registration agreement.
The Complaint is based upon Complainant's claimed rights in the trademark "Casino de Monte Carlo" registered with the Monaco Trademark Office. A copy of the registration certificate of the trademark appears in Exhibit D of Complainant's file.
Complainant has had a monopoly on games and gambling in Monaco since 1863.
On April 24, 1999 Respondent registered the domain name "monaco-casino.com".
The disputed domain name is not used for a website.
A. Complainant
According to Paragraph 4(b)(i) of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, adopted by ICANN on August 26, 1999 (herein after referred to as "the Policy"), Complainant requests a transfer in its favour of the Domain Name since it cumulatively meets the conditions listed under Paragraph 4 (a) of the Policy.
Complainant contends that the Domain Name is identical or at least very similar to the Complainant's registered trademark.
According to Complainant it would be wrong to focus solely on the term "Monte Carlo" since the Casino of Monaco is known equally under the two terms.
Respondent cannot demonstrate or establish any legitimate interest in the Domain Name. Respondent did not register any trademark related to "Casino de Monaco". Respondent has not established an active web page with the Domain Name.
The Domain Name has been registered and used in bad faith taking into account the famous character of Complainant's trademark and its monopoly in the area of gambling in Monaco.
B. Respondent
No response was submitted.
6. Discussion and Findings
Pursuant to paragraph 15(a) of the Rules, the Administrative Panel shall issue its decision on the basis of the statements and documents submitted in accordance with the Policy, the Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable.
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy provides that a Complainant must cumulatively establish each of the following three conditions to successfully challenge a registered domain name:
On December 1, 2000 the Administrative Panel noticed that the entry to Respondent's domain name, triggered the following message "Internet explorer cannot open the Internet site http://www.monacocasino.com, a connection with the server could not be established".
The Administrative Panel shall now examine whether the conditions specified under paragraph 4 (a) of the Policy are satisfied here.
(1) Right in a trademark - Identity or Confusing Similarity
According to paragraph 4 (a)(i) to (iii) of the Policy the Complainant in the Administrative Proceeding must prove that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
The domain name "monaco-casino.com" is confusingly similar to Complainant's trademark. For the Administrative Panel, in absence of a Response of Respondent, the distinction between "Monaco" and "Monte Carlo" does not appear to be determining since Monte Carlo is commonly associated with the State of Monaco.
With regard to avoiding confusion, addition of the top level domain name ".com" is irrelevant.
(2) Respondent's rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name
According to Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy, evidence of any of the following circumstances shall demonstrate rights or legitimate interests of Respondent in the domain name at issue:
According to Complainant's allegations, not disputed by Respondent, Complainant has not licensed or otherwise permitted Respondent to use its trademark or to apply for any domain name incorporating all or part of this mark.
By not submitting a response, Respondent has failed to invoke any circumstances which could demonstrate, pursuant to paragraph 4 (c) of the Policy, any rights or legitimate interest in the Domain Name.
To the contrary, it appears that Respondent does not use the Domain Name for a website.
The Administrative Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the Domain Name.
(3) Registration and Use in Bad Faith
According to Paragraph 4 (b) of the Policy, evidence of any of the following circumstances shall demonstrate a bad faith registration and use of the Domain Name at issue:
Pursuant to paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the ICANN Policy the Complainant has to prove that the Respondent has registered and is using the Domain Name in bad faith. Paragraph 4(b) of the ICANN Policy provides a number of non-exhaustive circumstances which, if found to be present, are evidence of the registration and use of a Domain Name in bad faith.
Several facts must be taken into consideration:
In consideration of the above facts, the Administrartive Panel finds that, by registering the domain Name, Respondent prevents Complainant from reflecting its mark in a corresponding domain name.
In view of the foregoing and pursuant to Paragraph 4 (b) (ii) of the Policy, the Administrative Panel finds that Respondent registered and used the Domain Name in bad faith.
Consequently, the Administrative Panel considers that the three cumulative conditions provided under paragraph 4(a) of the Policy are met in this case.
7. Decision
In light of the foregoing, the Administrative Panel decides that the domain name "monaco-casino.com" must be transferred to Complainant in accordance with the ICANN Rules.