- The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant's service mark. Thus, Respondent’s possession of the disputed domain name completely precludes Complainant from using its registered mark in the global computer network
- Respondent has no right or legitimate interest in respect of the disputed domain name. ...Identical or Confusingly Similar
In accordance with Respondent's concession on this point, the Panel finds that Complainant owns a valid registration of the service mark, "Windsor", with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (i.e., U.S. ...
2002-11-21 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
Pursuant to the ICANN Policy, Complainant must convince the Panel on the following three criteria:
i) the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which
it holds rights;
ii) Respondent has no right or legitimate interests in the domain name;
iii) the domain name was registered and used in bad faith.
...Moreover, the Panel notes that the name of the unregistered company is Pernod Records -- in itself confusingly similar in sound to the Pernod-Ricard trade name; and in any event, this full name is not adequately reflected in the domain name at issue.
...
2002-05-14 - Case Details
The
Complainant also considers the disputed domain name to be confusingly similar
to its trade mark.
The Complainant considered that a member of the public viewing the domain name
address would most likely assume that persons responsible for the domain name
were licensed or sponsored by the Complainant.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant owns registrations of the trade mark "YORKSHIRE TELEVISION"
with which the domain name is virtually identical.
...
2003-06-16 - Case Details
Complainant alleges that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s THE FILM FREAK trademark. Complainant is of the opinion that the disputed domain name "identically includes Complainant’s FILM FREAK domain name, and his THE FILM FREAK trademark."
...D2000-1415)
and that, in this context it is sufficient that "the domain includes (…)
a confusingly similar approximation [of the trademark], regardless of the other
terms of the domain name." ...
2003-06-16 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
(a) Complainant’s Contentions
Complainant contends that the Domain Names are identical or confusingly similar to the dominant portion of the Complainant’s well-known registered SPEEDWAY and SPEEDY trademarks, and that the additional generic words "calling card" or "card" alone, do nothing to obviate any confusion. ...These elements are set forth in Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy:
- "that the domain name registered by the respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and
- that the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
- that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith."
...
2002-08-12 - Case Details
Significantly, the Respondent
does not dispute that the Complainant is entitled to the Domain Name.
6.Discussion and Findings
Para. 4(a) of the Policy
requires that The Complainant must prove each of the following:
-The Domain Name is
identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the
Complainant has rights; and
-The Respondent has
no right or legitimate interest in respect of the Domain Name; and
-The Domain Name has
been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...Clearly the Domain Name
is either identical or confusingly similar to the Domain Name and it is one
in which the Complainant asserts rights and in which the Respondent does not
dispute such rights.
...
2002-07-09 - Case Details
Complainant
First, Complainant contends that it has common law rights to "Sarah Lawrence College"
by virtue of the name it has used to describe its educational facilities for
more than 70 years, and that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar.
Complainant further notes that it has filed three trademark and service mark
applications with the USPTO.
...D2002-0939
(December 20, 2002), which is one of many UDRP cases involving a company
affiliated with the Respondent in this dispute.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
A Complainant may satisfy its burden by establishing that it has rights in
a common law trademark. ...
2003-07-14 - Case Details
Further the Complainant contends that the domain name the subject of the Complaint is confusingly similar to its own trade marks, that the Respondent has no legitimate interest in the domain name and that the Respondent has registered and used the name in bad faith.
...Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The panel finds that the domain name is confusingly similar for the purposes of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the ICANN Policy to what the Complainant styles as its "AT&T Broadband" common law trade marks and its registered and common law trade mark AT&T.
...
2002-12-18 - Case Details
Domain name identical or confusingly similar
The Complainant has provided evidence of ownership of several trademark registrations and applications for VOGUE in different countries, including the Italian registration No. 207823 / No. 496080 dating back September 1965, in class 16 for the word mark VOGUE ITALIA.
...The Panel finds that the Complainant’s lack of action does not mean that others may register domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s marks as already stated i.a. in Bloomberg L.P. v. G. Sandhu FA0012000096261 (NAF February 12, 2001).
...
2001-11-13 - Case Details
- The Berry marks are prominently featured at the Berry Company's online sites located at , , and (Complaint Exhibit D).
- The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's mark because the domain name is identical to and incorporates in its entirety Complainant's mark, adding only the <.com> top level domain designation, which the U.S. ...Discussion and Findings
In order for Complainant to prevail and have the disputed domain name, , transferred to it, the Complainant must prove the following (the Policy, para 4(a)(i-iii):
- the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
- the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
- the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith
Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has exhibited a copy of the United States principal register
registration for the service mark The Berry Company, registration no. 1,605,880
dated July 10, 1990, in international classes 35 and 41 for telephone
directory services and advertisements (Complaint Exhibit C). ...
2002-03-07 - Case Details
Under paragraph 4 (a) of the Policy, Complainant must prove each of the following:
(i) the domain name in issue is identical or confusingly similar to complainant’s
trademark or service mark;
(ii) respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain
name; and,
(iii) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...Numerous WIPO decisions in this connection
have ruled that the fact that a trademark is incorporated in its entirety, is
per se sufficient to establish that the domain name is identical or confusingly
similar to the registered trademark (see amongst others Nokia Corporation
v. Phonestop, WIPO Case No. ...
2002-08-06 - Case Details
These are as follows:-
(i) The Respondent's domain names are identical or confusingly similar to
a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;
(ii) The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect of the
domain names;
(iii) The Respondent's domain names have been registered and are being used
in bad faith.
...i) The Respondent's domain names are identical or confusingly similar to
a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights
The Complainant submits that the only difference between the Respondent's domain
name and the Complainant's trade marks is the addition of the words "sports
book". ...
2002-09-06 - Case Details
i) That the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly
similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
In its Response the Respondent admits that the disputed domain names are similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights. ...Furthermore the Complainant finds no records indicating that the Respondent is involved in any legitimate enterprise under a name identical or confusingly similar to the mark in which the Complainant has rights.
By contrast the Respondent submits that the Respondent has a legitimate interest in respect of the disputed names. ...
2002-10-14 - Case Details
The Complainant contends that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to its EXPEDIA trademark, that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the Domain Name, and that the Respondent registered and used the Domain Name in bad faith.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Domain Name is identical to the Complainant’s trademark and domain name
except for the addition of the hyphen and the word "cruise." ...
2003-08-11 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant essentially contends that:
a. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant and/or its subsidiaries have acquired substantial reputation
and goodwill in the mark SIME DARBY and/or variations thereof. ...It is the Complainant’s contention
that the disputed domain name registered under the name of the Respondent is
identical and/or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade/service mark
SIME DARBY and/or the Complainant’s corporate name SIME DARBY.
...
2003-09-26 - Case Details
Said circumstances are the following ones:
(i) To prove that the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;
(ii) To prove that the Respondent does not hold rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names;
(iii) To prove that the disputed domain names have been registered and are being used by the Respondent in bad faith.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The first element required by the Policy is that the disputed domain name and the "ELENA MIRO" trademarks are identical or confusingly similar.
...
2004-01-07 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant submits that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to its trademark "Ticketmaster" in which it has rights.
Furthermore, the Complainant holds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name for the following reasons:
- the Respondent claims long use when actual use is less than six months;
- the Respondent engages in dishonest practices;
- the Respondent has no trademark rights in the Domain Name and the Respondent has no legitimate interest and can show no bona fide use.
...Discussion and Findings
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy lists three elements that the Complainant must prove to merit a finding that the domain name of the Respondent be transferred to the Complainant:
(i) The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights, and
(ii) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name, and
(iii) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2004-04-20 - Case Details
Complainants
The disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the First and Third Complainants’ HOUSE OF CB
mark.
The Respondents have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Based on the evidence presented, the Panel finds that the Complainant has rights in the HOUSE OF CB
mark.
...
2023-04-06 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Based on the evidence submitted, the Panel finds that the Complainant has rights in the TATA mark.
...Bearing in mind that the first element of paragraph 4(a) functions primarily as a standing requirement, the Panel considers that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark. See WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.7.
Therefore, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to two trademarks in which the Complainant has rights. ...
2021-07-15 - Case Details
As the amended Complaint removed Contact Privacy as a named Respondent, the Panel considers it appropriate to treat the Respondent as the entity (Terry Majamaki) named in the amended Complaint.
C. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has established (albeit, only in response to the Panel Order of October 18, 2014) that it has rights in a registered mark for THE GREAT WALL MARATHON. The Panel considers that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to that mark.
Whether a mark is confusingly similar to a domain name is to be generally judged against the dominant textual elements of the mark. ...
2014-11-11 - Case Details