In the absence of any license or permission from the Complainant to use its
trademarks and the composition of the disputed domain name, no actual or contemplated bona fide or
legitimate use of the disputed domain name could reasonably be claimed (see, e.g., Sportswear Company
S.P.A. v. Tang Hong, WIPO Case No. D2014-1875; and LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith,
Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO Case No. ...
2024-06-03 - Case Details
Por ello, de conformidad
con los criterios de los paneles, que han reconocido que cuando la marca de la Promovente es reconocible
en el nombre de dominio en disputa, hay semejanza en grado de confusión, aunque se añadan otros
elementos. (Ver LEGO Juris A/S c. Pablo Alberto Camarena Carreola, Caso OMPI No. DMX2023-0001).
iii. La presencia de la palabra KAESER que identifica a las marcas de la Promovente se encuentra
claramente incluida dentro del nombre de dominio en disputa, lo que basta para concluir que existe la
similitud en grado de confusión que exige la LDRP.
...
2024-04-29 - Case Details
D2019-0733; Inter IKEA Systems BV (IISVB) v. Hosein Bagheri, WIPO Case No.
D2016-0432; LEGO Juris A/S v. Simonovi Eood, WIPO Case No. D2012-0863). The Panel finds that the
disputed domain name carries a risk of implied affiliation with the Complainant. ...
2024-05-30 - Case Details
Moreover, based on the circumstances of the case and the use made of the Disputed Domain Name, the
Panel finds that the Respondent is not making a bona fide offering of goods or services nor making a
legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the Disputed Domain Name under the circumstances of the case.
See Lego Juris A/S v. Nofel Izz, JID, WIPO Case No. 2019-2601. Furthermore, the Respondent’s use of a
Complainant’s employee’s name and the Complainant’s name when registering the Disputed Domain Name
does not confer rights or legitimate interests on the Respondent.
...
2025-11-27 - Case Details
Moreover,
based on the circumstances of the case and the use made of the Disputed Domain Name to resolve to an
inactive error landing page, the Panel finds that the Respondent is not making a bona fide offering of goods
or services nor making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the Disputed Domain Name under the
circumstances of the case. See Lego Juris A/S v. Nofel Izz, JID, WIPO Case No. 2019-2601.
Finally, the use of a disputed domain name for phishing “can never confer rights or legitimate interests on a
respondent.” ...
2025-11-04 - Case Details
Moreover,
based on the circumstances of the case and the use made of the Disputed Domain Name to resolve to an
inactive landing page entitled “Coming Soon”, the Panel finds that the Respondent is not making a bona fide
offering of goods or services nor making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the Disputed Domain
Name under the circumstances of the case. See Lego Juris A/S v. Nofel Izz, JID, WIPO Case No.
2019-2601. Furthermore, the Respondent’s use of a Complainant’s employee’s name and
“theparkingspotusa.com” when registering the Disputed Domain Name does not confer rights or legitimate
interests on the Respondent.
...
2025-10-17 - Case Details
The Complainant requested that the language of the proceeding be
English for several reasons, including the fact that the Complainant is allegedly unable to communicate in
Chinese and translation of the Complaint would unfairly disadvantage and burden the Complainant and delay
the proceedings and adjudication of this matter; that the disputed domain name is comprised of Latin
characters; that the website previously reachable through the disputed domain name featured various
phrases in English including “Unlock exclusive savings” and “Free shipping on all orders over $50.00” and
that the Respondent has been involved in numerous prior UDRP proceedings, all of which have been held in
English, see for example LEGO Juris A/S v. 朱杰 (jie zhu), WIPO Case No. D2023-5391.
In exercising its discretion to use a language other than that of the registration agreement, the Panel has to
exercise such discretion judicially in the spirit of fairness and justice to both parties, taking into account all
relevant circumstances of the case, including matters such as the parties’ ability to understand and use the
proposed language, time and costs (see WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP
Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), section 4.5.1).
...
2025-08-05 - Case Details
WIPO Overview 3.0, sectie 1.7.
1 Aangezien de Regeling verregaand is gebaseerd op de Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (“UDRP”), is het vaste
jurisprudentie dat zaken die zijn beslist op grond van zowel de Regeling als de UDRP en dus WIPO Overview 3.0 relevant zijn voor
deze procedure (zie bijvoorbeeld LEGO Juris A/S v. Stichting RIBW ZWWF, WIPO Case No. DNL2011-0042 en Arie Hendrik den Draak
v. RAPIDE Internet, WIPO Zaaknr. ...
2025-01-23 - Case Details
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
page 5
Tang Hong, WIPO Case No. D2014-1875; and LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith,
Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO Case No. ...
2024-10-07 - Case Details
Noting the composition of the disputed domain
names, in the absence of any license or permission from the Complainant to use its trademarks, no actual or
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
page 5
contemplated bona fide or legitimate use of the disputed domain names could reasonably be claimed (see,
e.g., Sportswear Company S.PA. v. Tang Hong, WIPO Case No. D2014-1875; and LEGO Juris A/S v.
DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO
Case No. ...
2024-10-04 - Case Details
The Panel takes this as
corroborating evidence of Respondent’s bad faith. LEGO Juris A/S v. Ammar Briouel / Brahim Mahjoubi,
WIPO Case No. D2019-0750 (involving website suspension following a takedown request by Complainant).
...
2025-04-14 - Case Details
In the absence of any license
or permission from the Complainant to use its trademarks and the composition of the disputed domain name,
no actual or contemplated bona fide or legitimate use of the disputed domain name could reasonably be
claimed (see, e.g., Sportswear Company S.P.A. v. Tang Hong, WIPO Case No. D2014-1875; and LEGO
Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host
master, WIPO Case No. ...
2024-07-25 - Case Details
The Complainant provided evidence that it owns trademark registrations of the CRACKER BARREL marks
long before the date that 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. ...
2022-06-02 - Case Details
The Complainant provided evidence that it owns trademark registrations of the MODERNA Marks long
before the date that 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 trademarks (see LEGO Juris A/S
v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO
Case No. ...
2022-07-08 - Case Details
Prior UDRP panels have held that bad faith can be found where a
domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark that its very use by someone with no
connection to the trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith (LEGO Juris A/S v. store24hour; WIPO Case
No. D2013-0091,). Given the reputation of the L’ORÉAL trademark, registration in bad faith can be inferred.
...
2022-04-21 - Case Details
In the Panel’s view, such conduct cannot be regarded as giving rise to rights or
legitimate interests on the part of the Respondent to register and use the disputed domain name (see, e.g.,
LEGO Juris A/S v. Andrei Novakovich, WIPO Case No. D2016-1513).
The Respondent has no right or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name resolving to an inactive
website (see, e.g., Philip Morris USA Inc. v. ...
2022-04-13 - 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. ...
2022-04-27 - Case Details
In the absence of any license or permission from the Complainant to use their trademarks, the
composition of the disputed domain name, and the fact that the disputed domain name has been used to
create email addresses used in an attempt to impersonate the Complainant, no actual or contemplated
bona fide or legitimate use of the disputed domain name could reasonably be claimed (see, e.g., Sportswear
Company S.P.A. v. Tang Hong, WIPO Case No. D2014-1875; and LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd,
David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO Case No.
...
2024-04-25 - Case Details
Where the trademark is recognizable
within the disputed domain name, the addition of other terms – whether descriptive, geographical, pejorative,
meaningless, or otherwise – would not prevent a finding of confusing similarity under the first element (WIPO
Overview 3.0, section 1.8; and LEGO Juris A/S v. DBA David Inc/ DomainsByProxy.com, WIPO Case No.
D2011-1290).
Furthermore, it is generally maintained that the addition of a gTLD is a standard registration requirement.
...
2023-09-08 - Case Details
In the present case, the Panel notes that Respondent by incorporating the entirety of Complainant’s famous
GEICO Mark into the disputed domain name to access a website featuring that mark to confuse consumers,
providing a “opening soon” banner appears inactive and similar in configuration to those “coming soon” sites
considered in decisions by prior UDRP panels under the doctrine of passive holding. See LEGO Juris A/S v.
Registration Private, Domains by Proxy, LLC / Leonel Andaya, WIPO Case No. D2021-0563; see also
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?...
2023-08-24 - Case Details