D2005-0629 (August 5, 2005) (domain name confusingly similar to trademark PEPSI); C. & A. Veltins GmbH & Co. KG v. Heller Highwater Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2004-0466 (domain name confusingly similar to trademark VELTINS); Inter-IKEA Systems B.V. v. Evezon Co. Ltd., WIPO Case No. D2000-0437 (August 11, 2000) (domain name confusingly similar to IKEA trademark). ...
2005-12-22 - Case Details
Respondent
The following contentions are summarised from the Response.
Identical or confusingly similar
The Respondent contends that “Yellow Pages” and “Yellow Book” are not confusingly similar. ...It is clear that the Complainant’s mark is well known in Australia.
Identical or confusingly similar
The question is then whether the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark ‘Yellow Pages’.
...
2006-08-11 - Case Details
Complainant
Complainant has alleged that:
The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights.
The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the VAN CLEEF & ARPELS marks because it merely excludes a certain non-essential element of the mark.
The omission of non-essential elements does not render the disputed domain name any less confusing for purposes of the confusingly similar analysis. The disputed domain name is further confusingly similar because it misspells one essential element of the mark, “arpels” by eliminating the “s” at the end.
...
2013-11-14 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Respondent’s domain name is confusingly similar
to Complainant’s AMAZON.COM® and AMAZON.COM OUTLET® marks. ...D2001-1392 (April 10, 2002) ( domain
name confusingly similar to the AMAZON.COM® mark).
Administrative panels and arbitrators considering similar cases where registrants
simply added descriptions of services or products to a registered trademark
have found such domain names to be confusingly similar. ...
2003-07-04 - Case Details
D2004-0800 (finding Respondent’s domain name
confusingly similar to trademark “” and ordering
transfer); Société des Hôtels Méridien v. ...D2004-0926 (finding
Respondent’s domain name confusingly similar to trademark
“CEGETL” and ordering transfer); Karl’s Sales
and Services Company, LLC v. ...
2005-04-21 - Case Details
AAIM,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0403.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Pursuant to paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, Complainant must establish rights in a trademark and secondly that the disputed domain name is identical to or confusingly similar to the trademark in which Complainant has rights.
...D2003-0696 (a domain name is “nearly identical or confusingly similar” to a complainant’s mark when it “fully incorporate[s] said mark”; holding , , and other domain names confusingly similar to the complainant’s PEPSI mark); and Playboy Enterprises International, Inc. v. ...
2011-09-14 - Case Details
D2003-0054 ( is confusingly similar to CITGO trademark); Easy Group IP Licensing Limited v. Amjad Kausar,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0012 ( is confusingly similar to United Kingdom trademark EASYJET); Match.com, L.P., v. ...The finding that the disputed domain name is very confusingly similar to the trademark provides the foundation for the inference that the disputed domain name is intentionally confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark.
...
2013-01-03 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant contends that it is the owner of the CAMPING WORLD Mark and that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar because it incorporates the entirety of Complainant's Mark. ...Complainant further contends that the Disputed Domain Name is identical with and confusingly similar to the trademark pursuant to the Policy paragraph 4(a)(i). Respondent has not contested the assertions by Complainant that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the CAMPING WORLD Mark.
...
2015-12-04 - Case Details
As such, they are confusingly similar to Complainant’s Blue Marks. Respondents’ domain name, which comprises Complainant’s well-known BLUE mark and simply adds generic terms used to denote pharmaceutical products is thus confusingly similar to Complainant’s Blue Marks.
...As such, Complainant has made
a strong case that these three terms at issue are identical or confusingly similar
to Complainant’s marks.
2.
The case for confusing similarity with respect to is a more difficult one to make. ...
2005-02-28 - Case Details
As to Complainant’s contention that the disputed domain names are "confusingly similar" to Complainant’s trademarks within the meaning of the Policy, Complainant relies primarily on previous ICANN decisions that have found domain names that combine a trademark with the word "sucks" to be confusingly similar to the trademark. ...Furthermore, there is at least one other federal case similar to Ballys and our Case that follow this same reasoning, viz., "sucks" appended to a famous trademark used as a domain name for websites used to discuss or criticize the business of the trademark owner results in a non-infringing and not confusingly similar use of the trademark. ...
2001-01-31 - Case Details
Complainant
The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant ’s trademark. The disputed
domain name, which adds the terms “security” and “mail” before a deliberate misspelling of the
Complainant’s trademark that uses a lowercase “l” instead of an “i”, is confusingly similar to the
Complainant’s trademark. ...The
Panel finds that the addition of terms “security” and “mail” in the disputed domain name does not prevent
finding it confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark.
Considering the above, the Panel finds the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant ’s
trademark, therefore, the Complainant has established its case under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2023-06-08 - Case Details
Tushar Sarin / Rockerzz, WIPO Case No. DCO2015-0015 ( held
confusingly similar to the AIRTEL); Wachovia Corporation v. Peter Carrington, WIPO Case No. D2002-0775
(, held virtually identical / confusingly similar to WACHOVIA); Backstreet
Productions, Inc. v. ...D2001-0654 ( and held confusingly
similar to BACKSTREET BOYS); and ArcelorMittal (Société Anonyme) v. Name Redacted, WIPO Case No.
...
2023-03-01 - Case Details
Identical or Confusingly Similar
Manifestly, the Domain Name is similar to the Complainant’s trade mark in that it commences with that trade mark, but is it ‘confusingly similar’ to the Complainant’s trade mark?
What is meant by "confusingly similar"? In the view of the Panel, if the word "confusingly" is to be given any meaning, the expression cannot equate to "similar". ...
2002-11-19 - Case Details
Complainant further contends that the Domain Names are identical with and confusingly similar to the trademark pursuant to the Policy paragraph 4(a)(i).
Respondent has not contested the assertions by Complainant that the Domain Names are confusingly similar to the trademark.
...D2000-0028 (transfer ordered where "cellularonechina.com" domain name was found to be identical or confusingly similar to the CELLULARONE trademark).
Administrative panels and arbitrators considering similar cases where registrants simply added descriptions of services or products to a registered trademark have found such domain names to be confusingly similar. ...
2001-04-26 - Case Details
D2001-0362 ( domain name was confusingly similar to “Microsoft” mark); ACCOR v. Eduardo Marchiori Leite,
WIPO Case No. D2004-0680 ( domain name was confusingly similar to “Thalassa” mark); Reuters Limited v. ...D2007-0430 (finding multiple domains were phonetically identical and thus confusingly similar to complainant’s mark and ordering transfer of the same).
Moreover, the mere addition of a generic word to a famous trademark results in a domain name that is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark. ...
2008-03-19 - Case Details
Complaint, Annex 30. As DN37 has already been found to be confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark, Disputed domain names which redirect users to a domain name that has been found to be confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark are ipso facto confusingly similar.
(ii) Disputed domain names that redirect users to DN35, DN20. DN35 has already been found to be confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark. Therefore, I find DN20 to be confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark.
...
2020-04-02 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
This element consists of two parts: first, does the Complainant have rights in a relevant trademark and, second, is the Disputed Domain Name identical or confusingly similar to that trademark. ...Further, the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s domain name , save for the addition of the dictionary term “access” and a hyphen in the Disputed Domain Name.
...
2021-06-25 - Case Details
The opposition was upheld and the Respondent’s registration was revoked on the ground that the Respondent’s mark was confusingly similar to the Complainant’s device mark. However, the decision of the Swedish Patent and Trademark Office of August 17, 2006, specifically held that the Respondent’s mark was not confusingly similar to the Complainant’s ACCENTURE word mark.
...The Office regarded only the combination of similarities in the names and their presentation in lower case together with the accent as sufficient to make them confusingly similar. The Office rejected the Complainant’s contention that the Respondent’s logo was confusingly similar to its word mark ACCENTURE and it would seem to follow from this that the word “Accentics” was not regarded as in itself confusingly similar to “Accenture”.
...
2008-06-20 - Case Details
Domains For Sale For You,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0051.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant must first show that it has rights in the mark upon which its claim is based. ...RE THIS DOMAIN FOR SALE - EMAIL,
WIPO Case No. D2002-0409 (finding that is confusingly similar to PFIZER).
Therefore, the Panel holds that the Complainant has succeeded in proving that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which it owns rights.
...
2008-08-13 - Case Details
The Complainant argues that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark and is nearly identical to the Complainant's domain name. ...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complainant has satisfied the first requirement that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered trademark, under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
B. ...
2022-02-15 - Case Details