It has been held in previous UDRP cases that knowledge of a corresponding mark at the time of the domain name's registration suggests bad faith (LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Caixa D'Estalvis I Pensions de Barcelona ("La Caixa") v. ...
2016-04-14 - Case Details
A TLD suffix generally has no capacity to distinguish a domain name from a trademark for the purposes of a comparison under the Policy. See Lego Juris A/S v. Chen Yong,
WIPO Case No. D2009-1611; Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG v. zhanglei,
WIPO Case No. ...
2016-12-14 - Case Details
Nor has the Complainant ratified that registration and use,
whether by permission, license, or by other legal means. See LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David
Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO Case No. ...
2022-04-14 - Case Details
The Complainant has provided evidence that it owns trademark registrations long before the disputed domain names were registered and that it is not affiliated with nor has it licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trademark (see LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2022-02-25 - Case Details
Domains by Proxy, Inc./Ostrid Co.,
WIPO Case No. D2008-0707 and LEGO Juris A/S v. Wesley Pals,
WIPO Case No. D2014-0336, they submit that the panels in those cases found that the addition of non-distinctive matter did nothing to distinguish the disputed domain name.
...
2021-10-26 - Case Details
Аналогічна позиція також висловлена комісіями у попередніх справах (див., наприклад, LEGO Juris A/S v. Anton Obrezkov справа ВОІВ No. DUA2020-0001).
У даній справі Позивач prima facieстверджує про відсутність прав або законних інтересів Відповідача щодо спірного доменного імені. ...
2020-10-02 - Case Details
The Complainant has provided evidence that it owns trademark registrations long before the disputed domain name was registered and that it is not affiliated with nor has it licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trademark (see LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2020-08-31 - Case Details
Further, according to the evidence submitted by the Complainant, the Respondent’s email address is connected to more than 4,000 active domain name registrations which comprise of third party trade marks, including , , , , and <lego-dvd.com>. This is evidence that the Respondent is engaging in a pattern of cybersquatting. As such, the Panel finds that the circumstances referred to in paragraph 4(b)(ii) of the Policy apply to the present case.
...
2020-12-07 - Case Details
The Complainant is not affiliated with nor has it licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trademark (see LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-08-03 - Case Details
The Complainant has provided evidence that it owns trademark registrations long before the disputed domain name was registered and that it is not affiliated with nor has it licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trademark (see LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-03-29 - Case Details
The Complainant has provided evidence that it owns trademark registrations long before the disputed domain name was registered and that it is not affiliated with the Respondent nor has it licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trademark (see LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-03-02 - Case Details
The Complainant has provided evidence that it owns trademark registrations long before the disputed domain name was registered and that it is not affiliated with nor has it licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trademark (see LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-02-23 - Case Details
Hulmiho Ukolen, Poste restante / Domain Admin, Whois protection, this company does not own this domain name s.r.o.,
WIPO Case No. D2016-0933;
LEGO Juris A/S v. Hulmiho Ukolen, Poste restante / Domain Admin, Whois protection, this company does not own this domain name s.r.o.,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-03-11 - Case Details
Previous panel decisions have recognized that actual knowledge of the Complainant’s trademarks and
activities at the time of the registration of the disputed domain name may be considered an inference of bad
faith. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte, WIPO Case No. D2010-0494.
Previous panel decisions have considered that the registration of a domain name incorporating a well-known
trademark by someone who has no connection whatsoever with the trademark is a clear indication of bad
faith. ...
2024-08-23 - Case Details
The Complainant has provided evidence that it owns trademark registrations of the INTERTRUST mark long
before the date that the disputed domain name was registered and that it is not affiliated with nor has it
licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trademark (see LEGO Juris A/S v.
DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO
Case No. ...
2023-01-05 - Case Details
The Complainant has provided evidence that it owned trademark registrations of the CARREFOUR mark
long before the date that the disputed domain name was registered and that it is not affiliated with nor has it
licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trademark (see LEGO Juris A/S v.
DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO
Case No. ...
2023-04-28 - Case Details
Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC / Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion
Comercio Electronico, WIPO Case No. D2019-3045; LEGO Juris A/S v. Registration Private, Domains By
Proxy, LLC / Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion Comercio Electronico, WIPO Case No. ...
2023-02-14 - Case Details
This conduct is known as “pornosquatting”, namely
the practice where confusion with a third party’s trademark is used to divert internet users to an adult-content
website for commercial purposes. In this sense, see LEGO Juris A/S v. Lu Zhi Tao, WIPO Case No.
D2023-0177 where the Panel’s finding was: “the Respondent has intentionally registered the disputed
domain names in order to generate traffic to its own website with adult content. ...
2024-01-23 - Case Details
For the purpose of assessing whether a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark, the generic Top-Level Domain suffix “.com” may be disregarded as being simply a necessary component of a generic Top-Level Domain (LEGO Juris A/S v. Whois Data Protection Sp. z o.o. / Mirek Nowakowski ROSTALCO Sp. z o.o.,
WIPO Case No. ...
2017-09-25 - Case Details
Hulmiho Ukolen, Poste restante / Whois protection, this company does not own this domain name s.r.o.,
WIPO Case No. D2016-0667; LEGO Juris A/S v. Hulmiho Ukolen, Poste restante / Domain Admin, Whois protection,
WIPO Case No. D2016-1604.
...
2017-06-22 - Case Details