Discussion and Findings
In accordance with paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, the Complainants must prove to the Panel that the following three circumstances are present in this case in order to obtain the transfer of the Domain Name:
(A) that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainants have rights; and
(B) that the Respondent does not hold rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name; and
(C) that the Domain Name has been registered and is being used by the Respondent in bad faith.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The first element required by the Policy is that the Domain Name and the GRAN CENTENARIO trademarks are identical or confusingly similar.
...
2005-12-13 - Case Details
Thus, Panel finds for the Complainant on the first element, that Respondent’s domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a mark in which the Complainant has rights and has duties to the grandparent corporation.
...That the MIELE.NET domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark in which the Complainant has rights;
2. That the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests with respect to the MIELE.NET domain name; and
3. ...
2000-09-20 - Case Details
It is further well established that the specific top level of the domain name such as ".net" or ".com" does not affect a domain name for the purpose of determining whether it is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark (See e.g. Busy Body, Inc. v. Fitness Outlet Inc., WIPO D2000-0127, paragraph. 6).
...Decision
For all of the foregoing reasons, this Panel decides that the Domain Name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark in which the Complainant has rights, that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name, and that the Respondent registered and used the Domain Name in bad faith. ...
2000-11-09 - Case Details
The Complainant
The Complainant contends that the Respondent has registered as domain names a mark which is identical to or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s Mail Mania mark, that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of that domain name and that the Respondent has registered and is using that domain name in bad faith.
...Discussion and Findings
6.1 The Policy para. 4a provides that the Complainant must prove each of the following:
- that the Respondent’s 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 has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
6.2 Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant’s US trade mark Mail Mania and the Respondent’s domain name in issue MailMania.com are, to all intents and purposes, identical. ...
2000-06-15 - Case Details
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy directs that the Complainant must prove each of the following:
- 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 legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
- the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...While the Panel does not concur with the Complainant’s view that the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical to the Complainant’s trademarks, the Panel finds that the domain name "Eltec.com" registered by the Respondent clearly is confusingly similar to the trademarks of the Complainant.
The website Eltec.com refers to copyrights of Domainnamesfor.com and DomainOs.com (Complaint, Annex 12). ...
2000-07-11 - Case Details
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy directs that the Complainant must prove each of the following:
i) 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,
ii) that the Respondent has no legitimate interests in respects of the domain name; and
iii) that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...Decision
In view of the above circumstances and facts the Panel decides, that the domain name registered by Respondent is confusingly similar to the trademark LOFO 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.
...
2000-11-10 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainants contends, inter alia, that:
- The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the aforementioned trademarks of the Complainants. According to the Complainants, the relevant part of the Domain Name is , which is identical or almost identical to Complainant’s registered trademarks .NUDOMAIN and .NU DOMAIN;
- The Respondents have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. ...The Respondents content that, on that latter
date, the Respondent did not have any legal rights as the Community trademark
was only registered on November 13, 2000.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
There is no question that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the trademarks registered and used by the Complainants. ...
2005-08-12 - Case Details
It is incumbent upon the Complainant to cumulatively show:
(i) that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which it holds rights; and
(ii) that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name; and
(iii) that the Domain Name was registered and used in bad faith.
...Decision
For the foregoing reasons, the Panel finds that:
- The Domain Name registered by the Respondent is confusingly similar to the common law and registered "AT&T" trademarks to which the Complainant has rights; and
- The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name; and
- The Domain Name has been registered and is being used by the Respondent in bad faith.
...
2002-10-24 - Case Details
The Panel is entitled to draw such inferences as it deems appropriate on the basis of Respondent’s lack of response to the complaint, and give such weight as it considers appropriate to the Complainant’s undisputed representations.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the domain name
incorporates the Complainant’s trademarks/ service marks NIS & NIS
SPARTA and is hence confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks.
...The addenda “online” in the
domain name does not prevent the domain name from being confusingly similar
to the Complainant’s trademark: see Barclays Bank PLC v. Mr. Mohammed
Hassan, (WIPO Case No. ...
2004-09-13 - Case Details
It is asserted that the subject domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark.
At the time the Respondent registered the subject domain name, the Complainant had three pending trademark applications for use of his name on various merchandise. ...There is a distinction in what must be shown to establish that a domain name is identical to a complainant’s mark and what is required to show that it is confusingly similar. The Complainant appears not to make the distinction. The test for both is objective. ...
2004-08-27 - Case Details
Advanced Chemill Systems,
WIPO Case No. D2001-0827.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has furnished prima facie evidence that it is the owner of the service mark CHESTERBROOK ACADEMY in the United States, and accordingly has rights in the same.
...The Panel accordingly finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark, and that paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy has been satisfied.
...
2005-10-06 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant is the owner of a number of registered trademarks for Le MERIDIEN and MERIDIEN.
...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Panel has no reason to doubt Complainant’s statement that the Respondent is not an authorized agent or licensee of the Complainant’s services and has no other permission to apply for any domain name incorporating the trademarks Le MERIDIEN or MERIDIEN.
...
2005-09-19 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Frank Gorshin is the actual birth name of the actor, Frank Gorshin, and was used by him professionally in motion picture and television since the mid 1950’s. ...The Panel finds that the actor Frank Gorshin developed common law trademark rights in his name and that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to that name.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Complainant must show that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name. ...
2005-11-11 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant alleges that the domain name incorporates in its entirety the Complainant’s registered mark SKUNK WORKS; the Respondent has simply added “motorsports” to the phonetic equivalent of the trademark.
...Panelist exercises
its discretion to draw adverse influence in part because of Respondent’s
express declaration in his email that he did not contest these proceedings,
which he deemed “a big bunch of nonsense,” and “a meaningless
intrigue.”
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the challenged domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s
registered marks because it incorporates the phonetic equivalent of Complainant’s
entire mark. ...
2004-12-06 - Case Details
The Policy contains
in its Paragraph 4(a) the elements to be pleaded in order for a mandatory administrative
proceeding such as this one to be held: Complainant must allege that a (i) Respondent’s
domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark
in which the Complainant has rights; that (ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate
interests in the domain name; and that (iii) Respondent’s domain name has been
registered and is being used in bad faith. ...Complainant avers that
(1) the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s "Cvsup"
product name referred to in Section 4 of this decision; (2) the Respondents
have no rights or legitimate interests in the trade name; and (3) the domain
name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2001-07-03 - Case Details
These elements are that:
(i)Respondent’s domain
name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which
the complainant has rights; and
(ii)Respondent has
no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(iii)Respondent’s domain
name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...The Panel
determines that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s
mark in the sense of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
Complainant has met the
burden of proving that Respondent is the registrant of a domain name that is
identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has
rights, and it has thus established the first of the three elements necessary
to a finding that Respondent has engaged in abusive domain name registration.
...
2001-07-03 - Case Details
These are as follows:-
(i) The Respondent’s 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 interest in respect of the
domain name; and
(iii) The Respondent’s domain name has been registered and is being used in
bad faith.
...i) The Respondents domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a
trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
The Complainant submits that the three domain names in dispute are identical
to the Complainant's registered mark save for the use of the hyphens between
"reg" and "vardy" in the domain name. ...
2001-07-13 - Case Details
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy directs that the Complainant must prove each of the following:
(i) that the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights; and,
(ii) that the Respondent has no legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and,
(iii) that the domain name has been registered and used in bad faith.
...Therefore this panel finds that Respondent has a legitimate interest in the use of the disputed domain names.
Identical or Confusingly Similar to Trademark
Given the conclusion that Complainant has not met its burden in relation to showing the existence of bad faith and an absence of legitimate interests under paragraphs 4(a)(ii) and 4(a)(iii) of the ICANN Policy, it is not necessary for the Panel to determine whether the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights. ...
2000-12-15 - Case Details
Furthermore, the Panel finds that the domain name "crateandbarrel.net" is confusingly similar to the trademarks in which the Complainant has rights.
6.3 The record does not show any legitimate non-commercial use or fair use by Respondent. ...Decision
7.1 The Panel decides that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the trademarks of Complainant, that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in such domain name, and that the domain name in issue has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
7.2 The Panel hereby orders that the registration of the domain name be transferred to Complainant.
...
2001-01-29 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
Complainant contends that Respondent makes impermissible use of the disputed domain name as it is identical, or confusingly similar, with its registered trademarks, and that a true confusion has resulted. Complainant further contends that Respondent makes no bona fide offerings of goods or services under the disputed domain name. ...The Panel does not find it necessary finally to resolve the competing claims regarding the extent of Complainant’s rights in the marks or whether the disputed domain is identical or confusingly similar to the claimed marks. Regardless of the extent of Complainant’s rights in the marks it does not succeed in this proceeding, as it does not meet its burden under the other elements of the Policy’s test.
...
2004-06-25 - Case Details