It is notably the owner of the following trademark registrations:
- VOLCOM, United States trademark registration No. 1725875, with f irst use in commerce dating
September 30, 1991, filed on February 21, 1992, registered on October 20, 1992, regularly renewed
since then, and designating products of class 25,
- VOLCOM, United States trademark registration No. 2689830, filed on September 20, 2000, registered
on February 25, 2003, regularly renewed since then, and designating products of classes 9 (with f irst
use in commerce on August 15, 1993), 16 (with first use in commerce on May 31, 1991) and 18 (with
f irst use in commerce on July 20, 1994),
- (Stone Logo), United States trademark registration No. 2689825, f iled on
September 20, 2000, registered on February 25, 2003, regularly renewed since then, and designating
products of classes 9 (with first use in commerce on August 15, 1993), 16 (with f irst use in commerce
on May 31, 1991) and 18 (with f irst use in commerce on July 20, 1994).
...Taking the foregoing provisions
into consideration the Panel f inds as follows.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the f irst element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...
2023-10-20 - Case Details
This demonstrates that the Respondent has registered the disputed domain name in bad
faith to extract some commercial advantage from the Complainant and/or f rom Complainant’s prospective
f ranchisees/distributors.
The Respondent’s intentions of subsuming the trademark ZUDIO appears to be to attract Internet traf f ic,
dupe Internet users looking for f ranchise opportunities with the Complainant or to commit the f raud of
phishing. ...The disputed domain name reproduces the Complainant’s trademark ZUDIO in its entirety, with the addition
of the term “f ranchise”. Previous panels have held that the reproduction of a famous or widely-known
trademark by an unaffiliated entity contributes for a f inding of bad faith. ...
2023-10-19 - Case Details
It also relies upon the Respondent’s use of false addresses which is said to support a f inding of bad
faith.
B. Respondent
5.4 The Respondent did not f ile a formal Response replying to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. ...However, the Panel is
satisfied that the Respondent’s knowledge and intentions at the time of registration are clear enough f rom
the form of the Domain Name itself , and the content of the website operating f rom the Domain Name.
...
2025-04-30 - Case Details
The Complainant submits that it is apparent that the Respondent
registered the disputed domain name in order to trade-of f the Complainant’s goodwill attaching to its
DANSKO mark and to confuse consumers into believing that the disputed domain name is af f iliated or
associated with the Complainant when that is not the case. ...WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.8.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which the Respondent may demonstrate
rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name.
...
2025-07-21 - Case Details
WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.8.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
page 4
B. ...In the present case, the Panel notes that it is dif f icult to conceive of any plausible use of the Disputed
Domain Name by the unaf f iliated the Respondent that would amount to good faith use, given that the
Disputed Domain Name reproduces the Complainant’s Trademark in its entirety. ...
2025-09-11 - Case Details
The disputed domain name was registered on February 6, 2025 and at the time of the Complaint f iling it
resolved to an inactive webpage displaying an error message.
The Respondent is based in Brazil.
5. ...WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.8.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which the Respondent may demonstrate
rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name.
...
2025-04-22 - Case Details
case=D2025-2311
page 3
d) the Respondent has not used the disputed domain name in connection with a bona f ide of fering of
goods or services
e) the Respondent has not made demonstrable preparations to use the disputed domain name in
connection with a bona f ide of fering of goods or services; and
f ) the best Respondent has not made a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain
name.
...Although the addition of other terms (here, a hyphen and “f inance”) may bear on assessment of the second
and third elements, the Panel f inds the addition of such terms does not prevent a f inding of confusing
similarity between the disputed domain name and the mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2025-12-05 - Case Details
WIPO Overview 3.0, sections 1.7 and
1.11.1.
Therefore, the Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which the Respondent may demonstrate
rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name.
...D2006-0483, where the panel found that, absent some contrary
evidence f rom a respondent, passive holding of a domain name does not constitute legitimate
noncommercial or fair use.
...
2025-07-02 - Case Details
It is well established that
a domain name which consists of a common, obvious, or intentional misspelling of a trademark is considered
by panels to be confusingly similar to the relevant mark for purposes of the f irst element. This stems f rom
the fact that the domain name contains suf f iciently recognizable aspects of the relevant mark. ...See section 1.11.1 of
the WIPO Overview 3.0.
Given the above, the Panel f inds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s GE
AEROSPACE trademark for purposes of the Policy. ...
2025-08-27 - Case Details
The Complaint claims that the Complainant’s products, including in particular f loor
and wall tiles, are available under the trademark ASCALE in more than 150 countries.
Amongst other things, the Complainant promotes its products under the trademark ASCALE f rom a website
at “www.ascale.es”.
...https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
page 5
The Policy is intended to provide an ef f icient and expeditious process to deal with clear cases of
cybersquatting. To that end, it lays down a two stage process of “pleading” or brief ing – the f iling of a
Complaint and the f iling of a Response. ...
2023-11-30 - Case Details
The Complainant forwarded to the Center a message that purported to be an email dated October 16, 2025
f rom the Respondent to the Center which had come into the Complainant’s hands. The said message
acknowledged receipt of a notice f rom the Center together with an amended Complaint.
...Panels have held that the use of a domain name for illegitimate activity here, claimed as
impersonation/passing of f , or other types of f raud can never confer rights or legitimate interests on a
respondent. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.13.1.
...
2025-12-04 - Case Details
PrivacyProtect.org / Sylvia Paras, WIPO Case No. D2011-2011 (f inding
bad faith where the respondent used the disputed domain name to attract Internet users who mistakenly
believed that the disputed domain name was af f iliated with the complainant).
...Panels have held that the use of a domain name for illegal activity here, (claimed impersonation/passing of f )
constitutes bad faith. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.4. Having reviewed the record, the Panel f inds the
Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain names constitutes bad faith under the Policy.
...
2024-07-03 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notif ied the Respondent’s default on August 26, 2025.
page 2
The Center appointed George R. F. Souter as the sole panelist in this matter on August 29, 2025. The Panel
f inds that it was properly constituted. ...trademark in mind, and f inds that the disputed domain name was registered in bad faith.
Panels have found that the non-use of a domain name would not prevent a f inding of bad faith under the
doctrine of passive holding. ...
2025-09-18 - Case Details
Factual Background
The Complainant operates in the f ield of global brokerage and f inancial technology.
The Complainant holds a portfolio of trademark for BGC in different jurisdictions. ...There are no exceptional circumstances within paragraph 5(f ) of the Rules to prevent the Panel f rom
determining the dispute based upon the Complaint, notwithstanding the failure of the Respondents to f ile a
Response. ...
2025-11-10 - Case Details
WIPO Overview
3.0, section 1.8.
The Panel f inds the f irst element of the Policy has been established.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which the Respondent may demonstrate
rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name.
...That risk of implied affiliation is further reinforced by the
content of the website and the use of the Complainant’s trademark and logos similar to the Complainant’s
logo and f igurative trademark.
In addition, under paragraph 14(b) of the Rules the Panel may draw f rom the lack of response of the
Respondent such inference as it considers appropriate. ...
2025-04-11 - Case Details
The
Panel f inds the Respondent registered and has used the disputed domain names with opportunistic bad
faith, with the intention to increase the traffic to its websites and probably to perform any type of phishing or
other type of f raud.
...Such
conduct, if it were true, constitutes bad faith under the Policy (WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.4). The Panel
f inds, however, there is not sufficient evidence in the record to consider the Respondent is involved in any
f raud.
...
2025-06-23 - Case Details
The Panel has not received any requests f rom the Complainant or the Respondents regarding further
submissions, waivers or extensions of deadlines, and the Panel has not found it necessary to request any
further information f rom the Parties.
...The Panel f inds that there is plausible evidence that the disputed domain names are
subject to common control, and that it would be procedurally ef f icient, fair, and equitable to all Parties to
accept the Complainant’s consolidation request. ...
2023-11-24 - Case Details
Further, the Domain
Name uses Complainant’s GOOD MYTHICAL MORNING Mark on each webpage and claims to be the
“of f icial” GOOD MYTHICAL MORNING merchandise store. Thus, it should be presumed that the only
reason Respondent selected the Domain Name was because it was substantially similar to Complainant’s
GOOD MYTHICAL MORNING Mark and would cause consumers to believe Respondent is af f iliated with
Complainant.
...It can thus be concluded that
Respondent is seeking to capitalize of f of the success and reputation of Complainant and to cause
page 3
consumers to purchase inferior goods f rom Respondent’s website instead of authentic goods f rom
Complainant’s website.
...
2023-10-30 - Case Details
However, the Respondent in this case has chosen to f ile no Response to these assertions by the
Complainant, and there is no evidence or allegation in the record that would warrant a f inding in favor of the
Respondent on this point.
...C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
The Panel f inds that there is suf f icient evidence to f ind bad faith in this case.
First of all, the registration of the disputed domain name which is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s
well-known EQUIFAX mark by the Respondent, who is unaf f iliated with the Complainant, creates a
presumption of bad faith. ...
2023-12-06 - Case Details
It appears f rom Annexes 3 and 6 to the Complaint that the Complainant promotes its services f rom the
website “www.coderio.co”. ...As the Complaint points out, the Complainant successfully opposed an attempt by a Coderio LLC to register
CODERIO as a trademark in the United States in respect of technology, computer and sof tware services in
International Class 42. The Panel has established f rom the United States Patent and Trademark Of f ice
records online that:
(a) The application was accorded serial number 97898334;
(b) The application was f iled on April 20, 2023;
(c) The application was f iled by a Wyoming corporation based in California called Coderio LLC;
(d) The application was signed on behalf of Coderio LLC by “Jose Colina” as the company’s CEO; and
(e) The Complainant’s opposition to registration (initially f iled on April 4, 2024) was successful when
Coderio LLC submitted an abandonment of the application on January 8, 2025.
...
2025-04-15 - Case Details