The Panel concludes that the addition of a country name (in the present case, “brasil”) to a trademark in a
disputed domain name does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity (LEGO Juris A/S v. 曹梦容 (Banks
Michelle), WIPO Case No. D2024-0427, dm-drogerie markt GmbH + Co. KG v. ...
2025-11-11 - 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
As noted by a previous panel in similar circumstances, the WhoIs details appear to be another way the
Respondent seeks to falsely affiliate itself with the Complainant (see LEGO Juris A/S v. Muhammed Melih
TAN, LegoToyx, WIPO Case No. D2024-4102). The Panel has taken into account that although the WhoIs
data indicates that the Respondent is called “AL DI” and comes from an organization called “ALDI” from
India, there is no indication that is the actual name of the Respondent or that such organization actually
exists. ...
2025-09-09 - Case Details
Noting the composition of the
disputed domain names, in the absence of any license or permission f rom the Complainant to use its
trademarks, no actual or contemplated bona f ide or legitimate use of the disputed domain name 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. ...
2025-09-04 - 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
Panels have previously held that a finding of bad faith can be established where a complainant’s trademark
is shown to be well-known or in wide use at the time of registration of the disputed domain name (see LEGO
Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No. D2013-0091). The Respondent must have been aware of the
Complainant’s Trademark when registering and using the Disputed Domain Name given the well-known
nature of the Complainant’s Trademark and it was put into use well before the Respondent registered the
Disputed Domain Name.
...
2025-05-07 - Case Details
In the absence of any license or
permission from the Complainant to use its trademarks, 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. ...
2025-05-01 - Case Details
Panels have previously held that a finding of bad faith can be established where a complainant’s trademark
is shown to be well-known or in wide use at the time of registration of the disputed domain name (see LEGO
Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No. D2013-0091). The Respondent must have been aware of the
Complainant and the Complainant’s Trademark when registering and using the Disputed Domain Name
given the well-known nature of the Complainant’s Trademark and it was put into use well before the
Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Name. ...
2025-05-26 - Case Details
Panels have previously held that a finding of bad faith can be established where a complainant’s trademark
is shown to be well-known or in wide use at the time of registration of the disputed domain name (see LEGO
Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No. D2013-0091). The Respondent is likely to have been fully aware
of the Complainant and the Complainant’s Trademark when it registered the Disputed Domain Name, given
the well-known nature of the Complainant’s brand, evidenced by the various trademark registrations for the
Complainant’s Trademark across the globe that was put into use well before the Respondent registered the
Disputed Domain Name. ...
2024-11-28 - Case Details
Panels have previously held that a finding of bad faith can be established where a complainant’s trademark
is shown to be well-known or in wide use at the time of registration of the disputed domain name (see LEGO
Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No. D2013-0091). The Respondent must have been fully aware of the
Complainant and the Complainant’s Trademark when it registered the Disputed Domain Name, given the
well-known and distinctive nature of the Complainant’s brand, evidenced by the various trademark
registrations for the Complainant’s Trademark that was put into use before the Respondent registered the
Disputed Domain Name.
...
2024-12-09 - Case Details
In
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
the absence of any license or permission from the Complainant to use its trademarks, the composition of the
disputed domain name, and the fact that the disputed domain name resolves to a look-a-like version of the
Complainant’s French website, no actual or contemplated bona fide or legitimate use of the disputed domain
name 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. ...
2024-12-23 - 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
Panels have previously held that a finding of bad faith can be established where a complainant’s trademark
is shown to be well known or in wide use at the time of registration of the disputed domain name (see LEGO
Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No. D2013-0091). The Respondent must have been aware of the
Complainant and the Complainant’s Trademark when registering and using the Disputed Domain Names
given the well-known nature of the Complainant’s Trademark and the fact that it was put into use well before
the Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Names.
...
2025-12-04 - Case Details
Noting the composition of the
disputed domain name, in the absence of any license or permission from the Complainant to use its
trademarks, no actual or contemplated bona fide or legitimate use of the disputed domain name 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. ...
2024-10-31 - 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
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. ...
2024-10-29 - 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 trademarks suggests opportunistic bad faith (see LEGO Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No.
D2013-0091). Given the reputation and distinctiveness of the Complainant’s trademark, registration in
bad faith can be inferred in the present case.
...
2022-12-05 - 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 trademarks suggests opportunistic bad faith (see LEGO Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No.
D2013-0091). Given the reputation and distinctiveness of the Complainant’s trademark, registration in
bad faith can be inferred in the present case.
...
2022-12-05 - Case Details
The Complainant provided evidence that it owned the ERICSSON trademark registrations 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. ...
2023-03-21 - Case Details