corresponds to the <tao-0.com>, <open-taobao.com> or <tao-api.info> Disputed Domain Names. The Respondent’s use of a purported Chinese company Taobao Ltd. as the “registrant’s organization” in the registration information for the Disputed Domain Names <tao-imagine.com>; <tao-mama.com>; <tao-sp.org>; <taobao-sp.org>, <тао-бао.com> and <таобао-форум.com> does not confer rights in the Disputed Domain Names on the Respondent because the Complainant’s registration of the TAOBAO trademarks in China predates the dates of the Respondent’s registration of the Disputed Domain Names. The Respondent has also already been found lacking rights or legitimate interests in the TAOBAO mark in the URS cases. Second, the evidence on record shows that the Respondent owns no trademark rights in the TAOBAO trademarks. Third, the Panel accepts the Complainant’s contention that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the <tao-0.com>, <tao-api.info>, <tao-mama.com>, <tao-sp.org>, <тао-бао.com>, <таобао-форум.com>, <taobao-sp.org> Disputed Domain Names that the Respondent passively holds. Passive use of a domain name “would not of itself confer rights or legitimate interests arising from a "bona fide offering of goods or services" … or from "legitimate noncommercial or fair use" of the domain name...” 8 Even if the Respondent begins using the Inactive Domain Names, such use will not result in creation of rights or legitimate interests in the Inactive Domains because the Inactive Domains are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks and any use of the Inactive Domains may enable the Respondent to make unfair profit or divert consumers from the Complainant. See Microchip Technology, Inc. v. Milo Krejcik and EDI Corporation, d/b/a Aprilog.com, WIPO Case No. D2001-0337. Fourth, the evidence on file shows that the Respondent knows of the Complainant’s TAOBAO trademarks and the Taobao Marketplace and has been using the Disputed Domain Names <open-taobao.com> and <tao-imagine.com> to trade on the Complainant’s goodwill. Such use cannot provide the Respondent with rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Names. See, Madonna Ciccone p/k/a Madonna v Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com", WIPO Case No. D2000-0847. Although the word “Tao” has ordinary dictionary meanings in Russian9 that is not associated with the Complainant, nothing in the record supports a conclusion that the Respondent adopted and used the term “Tao” in good faith based on its ordinary dictionary meanings. The evidence on record shows that “www.open-taobao.com” website displays the following information in English: “Opentaobao.com is the official partner or the largest Chinese online auction Taobao.com. Our goal is to provide you with Taobao such as it is, only in Russian. We …simply integrated the entire resource Taobao into your own site.” However, the Complainant did not license, consent or otherwise authorize the Respondent to use its TAOBAO trademarks with the Disputed Domain Names. The evidence on file also shows that the “www.taoimagine.com” website allegedly assists users in finding products on the Complainant’s Taobao Marketplace by use of a photograph uploaded by user. The “Войти”10 and the “регистрация” 11 buttons redirect users to the online shopping website “www.выгоднокупи.рф” 12 ("Russian Website"), which is also referred to in the 8 Paragraph 2.6 of WIPO Overview 2.0. It means a Chinese high power or god, a historical region in Georgia, a Chinese first name and a Chinese surname and etc. See, http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/dic_synonims/308344/%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BE 10 It means «login» in Russian. 11 It means “registration” in Russian. 12 It means “buy at competitive prices” in Russian. 9 Page 9