About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

Full Text Search on WIPO Panel Decisions

Found 2341   document(s)s (0.029 sec)

Rows

<<  <  1941 - 1960  >  >>

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-0957 for dellservice.center html (23 KB)

In these circumstances, the Panel finds that the Oki Data test has not been passed by the Respondent (See LEGO Juris A/S v. Andrew Orr, WIPO Case No. D2015-1311; Oath Inc. v. Adit Gupta, WIPO Case No. D2020-2523). ...

2021-06-18 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-3271 for canvaasia.com pdf (167 KB)

UDRP panels have consistently found bad faith within the meaning of paragraph 4(b)(iv) in cases involving similar unauthorized domain name use (LEGO Juris A/S v. Domain Administrator, See PrivacyGuardian.org and Sun Chong, WIPO Case No. D2019-2263). ...

2022-11-04 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-2778 for pathe.club pdf (162 KB)

Given the reputation of the PATHE trademark and the unlikelihood of the Respondent selecting the disputed domain name for registration by chance, the Panel infers that the registration of the disputed domain name intended to draw income from the improper use of the connection to the Complainant was registration in bad faith. (See LEGO Juris A/S v. Floyd Goddard/ Oneandone, Private Registration, WIPO Case No. D2010-0544, the panel stated: “The Panel, in accordance with previous decisions issued under the UDRP, is of the opinion that actual knowledge of the Complainant’s trademarks and activities at the time of the registration of the disputed domain may be considered an inference of bad faith.”) ...

2022-10-10 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-1853 for lhvpank.com pdf (190 KB)

Such intentional targeting in bad faith is only further underscored by WhoIs evidence proffered by Complainant to show that Respondent has also targeted third party trademarks including CROCS, LEGO, NIKE, and TWITTER. Under the circumstances, any good faith or otherwise legitimate uses are rather implausible. ...

2022-08-19 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-3101 for distribution-sodexo.com pdf (292 KB)

This is a long-standing criterion to assess whether Respondent has right or interest in the Disputed Domain Name. (Also see, LEGO Juris A/S v. Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC / Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion Comercio Electronico, WIPO Case No. ...

2022-10-27 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-2508 for investorsvirgingalactic.com html (22 KB)

D2018-1291, ; eBay Inc. v. ebayMoving / Izik Apo, WIPO Case No. D2006-1307, ; LEGO Juris A/S v. DBA David Inc/ DomainsByProxy.com, WIPO Case No. D2011-1290, . Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the VIRGIN and VIRGIN GALACTIC trademarks in which the Complainant has rights. ...

2021-10-21 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-2801 for fordautomotor.com html (21 KB)

D2020-2500 (“using the Domain Names to host fraudulent email addresses in aid of a phishing scam cannot be considered a legitimate reason for registering the Domain Name”); LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO Case No. ...

2021-11-09 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision DNL2020-0011 for peli-air.nl, peli-nederland.nl, peliair.nl, pelicancase.nl, pelicases.nl html (22 KB)

A party that wishes a change of language – in this case only the Response is in Dutch – should substantiate that it would be unreasonably onerous if the submission were to be in English (e.g. LEGO Juris A/S v. M. Moench, WIPO Case No. DNL2009-0052). The Respondent has motivated its request for a translation of the Complaint by stating that its command of English is insufficient to understand the Complaint. ...

2020-07-21 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-2974 for lab2fab.com html (21 KB)

Bad faith may be found where a domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark that said use of the domain name by someone with no connection to the trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte, WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains, LLC, WIPO Case No. ...

2021-01-08 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-1065 for tiktokviet.com html (23 KB)

This disruption is a further indicator of use in bad faith. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Aamir Abdul Wahid, Spiro Line Media, WIPO Case No. D2019-0245. (v) The Respondent’s website seems to violate the TikTok application’s terms of service, which in the circumstances of this case, and noting the use of the disputed domain name, further supports the Panel’s finding on the Respondent’s bad faith. ...

2021-07-06 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-1804 for monster-energy.space html (23 KB)

Previous UDRP panels considering this issue came to the same conclusion. Please see LEGO Juris A/S v. lin zhang, WIPO Case No. D2020-0675. Therefore, the Panel disregards the gTLD for the purposes of this comparison. ...

2021-08-26 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-1613 for 21sextury.org html (24 KB)

This disruption of the Complainant’s business is a further indicator of use in bad faith. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Aamir Abdul Wahid, Spiro Line Media, WIPO Case No. D2019-0245. (v) The Panel is entitled to have regard to the lack of any substantive response on this point from the Respondent and draws an adverse inference from this. ...

2021-07-28 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-3349 for lavazza-store.com html (23 KB)

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 / Protection of Private Person, WIPO Case No. D2016-1513). Furthermore, the Respondent has no right or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name resolving to an inactive website at the time of this decision (see, e.g., Philip Morris USA Inc. v. ...

2021-03-04 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-0370 for onlinefr-leclerc.com html (23 KB)

Customer 0158491442 / Terry Sybert, WIPO Case No. D2020-2167; and LEGO Juris A/S v. Private Whois, Knock Knock WHOIS Not There, LLC / Legos Deak, WIPO Case No. D2019-2385. ...

2021-04-08 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-3561 for gifelify.com, giveify.com, giveilfy.com, givelfiy.com, givelifty.com, givelity.com, givellify.com, givelyfy.com, ivelify.com html (25 KB)

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. ...

2021-03-17 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2025-1167 for dangkygrabcar.com pdf (165 KB)

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 https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/ https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?...

2025-06-03 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2025-1497 for atacadaoexpressloja.com pdf (179 KB)

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. ...

2025-06-12 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2025-4858 for portliandlaathargood.click pdf (182 KB)

Numerous panels have viewed website suspension by the registrar or webhost, absent any explanation or attempted justification by the respondent, as added corroboration of bad faith. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Ammar Briouel / Brahim Mahjoubi, WIPO Case No. D2019-0750 (involving website suspension following a takedown request by Complainant); Hershey Entertainment & Resorts Company v. ...

2026-01-30 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision DRO2025-0007 for pedrali.ro pdf (188 KB)

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 Panel finds that the Respondent was likely 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. ...

2025-09-29 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2025-0201 for medtronex.com pdf (159 KB)

That aural resemblance is increased to the extent that the public may refer to the Complainant as “Medtronics” as, for example, people often mistakenly refer to “Lego” as “Legos”, or “Legoes”. As this requirement under the Policy is essentially a standing requirement, therefore, the replacement of the “ic” component of the Complainant’s trademark with “ex” does not preclude a finding of confusing similarity. ...

2025-02-19 - Case Details