Such awareness of the Complainant’s trademark suggests bad faith (see LEGO Juris A/S v. Domains by Proxy, Inc., DomainsByProxy.com / DBA David Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2011-1839; Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP v. ...
2021-03-10 - Case Details
Such awareness of the Complainant’s trademark suggests bad faith (see LEGO Juris A/S v. Domains by Proxy, Inc., DomainsByProxy.com / DBA David Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2011-1839; Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP v. ...
2021-03-10 - Case Details
参见WIPO Overview 3.0，第3.3节；Telstra Corporation Limited 诉 Nuclear Marshmallows，WIPO案件编号D2000-0003和LEGO Juris A/S 诉 lihailiang，WIPO 案件编号 DSO2011-0002。WIPO Overview 3.0的第3.3节进而要求专家组必须考察各种情况以认定被投诉人的行为是否具有恶意，并列举了几种可被视为恶意的情况，包括：(i) 投诉人商标的独特性或知名度，(ii) 被投诉人未作出答辩或提供任何实际或经得起考验的善意使用的证据，(iii) 被投诉人隐瞒身份，或使用虚假的联系方式（违反其注册协议），以及(iv) 不具由善意使用域名的可能性等。
...
2021-01-22 - Case Details
鉴于此，专家组认定本案的行政程序语言应该是中文，但是专家组决定接受投诉人所提交的英文投诉书和投诉书修正本及相关材料，不要求投诉⼈提供中文翻译本。专家组认为这一决定并不会给当事⼈双方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 实质性问题
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。
...
2021-03-04 - Case Details
Domain Administrator,
Caso OMPI No. D2004-0743; ver también LEGO Juris A/S v. pcmaniabg, Paisiy Aleksandrov,
Caso OMPI No. D2010-1965; Etihad Airways c. Domain Admin, Whois Privacy Corp,
Caso OMPI No. ...
2020-12-18 - Case Details
In addition, 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. ...
2020-11-25 - Case Details
Domain Admin, Privacy Protect, LLC (PrivacyProtect.org) / Hoang Anh Tuan / Nguyen The Khoi,
WIPO Case No. D2019-1361; LEGO Juris A/S v. Le Thi Ngoc Yen,
WIPO Case No. D2012-1627; Accor and SoLuxury HMC v. VB,
WIPO Case No. ...
2020-03-05 - 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和投诉书修正本及相关材料，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 实质性问题
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。
...
2019-05-22 - Case Details
Bad faith can also 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. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494, Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2019-10-18 - Case Details
Prior 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; Lancôme Parfums et Beauté & Cie, L’Oréal v. 10 Selling,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-04-12 - Case Details
David Da Silva / Contactprivacy.com,
WIPO Case No. D2007-1168; LEGO Juris A/S v. Private, Registration / Dohe Dot,
WIPO Case No. D2009-0753; and Nokia Corporation v. ...
2011-04-27 - Case Details
The disputed domain name is not simply the trademark or the trademark with some ancillary or accessory connotation: e.g. LEGO Juris A/S v. Legoverhuur.nl, Frank Schuermans,
WIPO Case No. D2011-1559 (legoverhuur.com) and IVECO S.p.A. v. ...
2012-02-06 - 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. ...
2015-01-15 - Case Details
Nokiagirls.com a.k.a. IBCC,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0102; LEGO Juris A/S v. Masayuki Sato,
WIPO Case No. D2011-1639; King.com Limited and Midasplayer.com Ltd. v. ...
2014-03-06 - Case Details
参见Aventis Pharma SA., Aventis Pharma Deutschland GmbH 诉 Jonathan Valicenti, WIPO案件编号D2005-0037和LEGO Juris A/S 诉 Chen Yong, WIPO案件编号D2009-1611。相反，可能加剧消费者的混淆。在争议域名中将“official”同“bikkembergs”一起使用而形成“bikkembergsofficial”, 极易使互联网用户误认为该网站是投诉人或投诉人授权的官方网站。...
2012-07-30 - Case Details
D2010-0936 ("[T]he addition of the descriptive word "beauty" to the Complainant's REVLON trade mark, by referencing the goods for which the mark is known, increases the likelihood of confusion."); LEGO Juris A/S v. Private, Registration/Dohe Dot,
WIPO Case No. D2009-0753 (adding terms that are generic or descriptive of Complainant's products is likely to produce more confusion since it creates an obvious association with Complainant); and Revlon Consumer Products Corporation v. ...
2011-01-13 - Case Details
Nevertheless, the Oki Data test has been widely adopted by previous UDRP panels and cited even if it refers to a non-authorized reseller, see e.g. LEGO Juris A/S v. Daniel Aziz,
WIPO Case No. D2011-1829 where the panel brought this case some attention and concluded that the Oki Data test was not fulfilled.
...
2012-07-20 - Case Details
The addition of the word “hub” suggests that the related website is a central location somehow related to the Complainant. As noted in LEGO Juris A/S v Private, Registration/Dohe Dot,
WIPO Case No. D2009-0753, the addition of a term that is generic or descriptive is likely to produce confusion since it creates an association with the Complainant. ...
2013-06-03 - Case Details
In this context, the Complainant refers to decisions where the panel found that there is bad faith registration 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. The Complainant cites here LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494 and Sanofi-aventis v. Nevis Domains LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2013-11-27 - 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,
WIPO Case No. D2016-1604; Accenture Global Services Limited v. ...
2018-01-03 - Case Details