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. ...
2023-04-19 - Case Details
In the absence of any license or
permission from the Complainants to use their 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. ...
2023-04-18 - 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.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. ...
2023-07-07 - Case Details
Como lo ha señalado la Promovente, sin licencia o permiso para utilizar estas marcas notorias, no se puede
reivindicar un uso legítimo o de buena fe, actual o contemplado, a ser utilizado en el nombre de dominio en
disputa (Groupe Auchan c. Gan Yu, Caso OMPI No. D2013-0188; y LEGO Juris A/S c. DomainPark Ltd,
David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, Caso OMPI No.
...
2024-03-04 - Case Details
In the absence
of any license or permission from the Complainants to use their 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 Second
Complainant’s 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.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. ...
2024-04-02 - 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.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. ...
2024-02-08 - 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 in its industry and the fact that it was put into
use well before the Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Names.
...
2025-08-29 - 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. ...
2025-01-13 - Case Details
Mustafa Yakin / Moniker Privacy Services, WIPO Case No. D2008-0016;
LEGO Juris A/S v. Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC / Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion Comercio
Electronico, WIPO Case No. ...
2025-01-29 - Case Details
That the disputed domain name incorporates the Complainant’s ECOLAB trademarks (and the
Complainant’s corporate name) in full, by only adding the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.site”, and
that several panel decisions have found that the mere addition of a gTLD fails to render a domain name
distinct from the complainant’s trademark (and cites WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected
UDRP Questions, Third Edition, (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), sections 1.7 and 1.11, and; Oki Data Americas, Inc.
v. ASD, Inc., WIPO Case No. D2001-0903; Lego Juris A/S v. Oleg Budak, WIPO Case No. D2023-4950).
II. Rights or Legitimate Interests
That the Respondent registered the disputed domain name without having the Complainant’s authorization
or consent and that the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, nor has the said
Respondent used the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services.
...
2025-06-19 - Case Details
These principles may in some specific circumstances apply to a
four letter acronym – there may be some four letter domain names where the corresponding brand is so well
known that the principles apply – DIOR or LEGO for example, but the Panel is not persuaded that the same
principle applies to four letter acronyms generally, and does not consider it applies here.
...
2024-06-25 - Case Details
In this regard, the Panel refers to the reverse WhoIs results provided by the Complainant, from which it
appears that the Respondent has also registered a number of domain names incorporating globally famous
third party brands such as ADIDAS, LEGO, and MATTEL. In these circumstances, the Panel considers that
the passive holding of the disputed domain names by the Respondent constitutes use of the disputed
domain names in bad faith. ...
2022-10-21 - Case Details
Third, the Panel finds, similar to other UDRP panels, that the addition of the generic Top-Level Domain
(“gTLD”) “.com” to the Disputed Domain Name does not constitute an element that may help avoid confusing
similarity for the Policy purposes (see, e.g., LEGO Juris A/S v. Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC /
Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion Comercio Electronico, WIPO Case No. ...
2022-09-20 - Case Details
Sportswear Company S.PA. v. Tang Hong WIPO Case No. D2014-1875; LEGO Juris A/S v.
DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO
Case No. ...
2022-09-26 - Case Details
D2012-1293 (): “previous UDRP decisions have found bad faith at the time of registration to exist where a domain name is so obviously connected with such a well-known trademark that its very use by someone with no connection with the trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith (LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; and Sanofi-aventis v. Nevis Domains LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2017-03-10 - Case Details
Bad faith may 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. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains, LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2017-03-08 - Case Details
鉴于此，专家组决定接受投诉人所提交的英文版投诉书及相关材料，不要求投诉人提供中文翻译文本，但是专家组决定使用中文作出本案裁决。专家组认为这一决定并不会给当事人造成不公平且能促使行政程序高效及经济地进行。参见 LEGO Juris A/S 诉 Zhong Huijie, WIPO 案件编号 D2011-1381。
6.2 分析与认定
根据政策第4条(a)项的规定，投诉书必须同时符合以下三个要素，才能胜诉。
...
2016-10-11 - Case Details
其中，“pentair”部分与投诉人的PENTAIR商标完全相同。另外，许多之前的UDRP案例已表明顶级域名与判断争议域名和商标是否相似通常而言无关。(参见LEGO Juris A/S 诉 Zhang Jian，WIPO 案件编号 D2010-0710)。
基于上述事实，投诉人的投诉请求满足政策第4(a)条的第一个要素。
B. 权利或合法利益
依据之前的UDRP案例，如果投诉人可以提供表面证据证明被投诉人对争议域名不享有权利或合法利益，那么被投诉人有责任提出主张及证据以证明其对争议域名享有权利或合法利益。...
2017-01-24 - Case Details
关于通用顶级域“.com”，专家组认为该部分在本案中亦不具有任何区别争议域名与投诉人商标的效果。参见LEGO Juris A/S 诉 Chen Yong，WIPO 案件编号 D2009-1611及Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG 诉 zhanglei，WIPO 案件编号 D2014-0080。
...
2017-01-17 - Case Details
鉴于此，专家组决定接受投诉人所提交的英文版投诉书及相关材料，不要求投诉人提供中文翻译文本，但是专家组决定使用中文作出本案裁决。专家组认为这一决定并不会给当事人造成不公平且能促使行政程序高效及经济地进行。参见 LEGO Juris A/S 诉 Zhong Huijie, WIPO 案件编号 D2011-1381。
6.2 分析与认定
根据政策第4条(a)项的规定，投诉书必须同时符合以下三个要素，才能胜诉。
...
2018-05-29 - Case Details