First, the Panel finds that the Respondent’s registration and use of the Disputed Domain Name indicate that
such registration and use has been done for the specific purpose of trading on the name and reputation of
the Complainant and its VF Mark. See Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847 (“[t]he only plausible explanation for Respondent’s actions appears to be an
intentional effort to trade upon the fame of Complainant’s name and mark”).
...
2023-01-18 - Case Details
Furthermore, the use of a domain name which intentionally trades on the fame of another and suggests
affiliation with the trademark owner contrary to the fact cannot constitute a bona fide offering of goods or
services (Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”, WIPO Case No.
D2000-0847; AB Electrolux v. Handi Sofian, Service Electrolux Lampung, WIPO Case No. ...
2023-02-09 - Case Details
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered
trademark DIRTYROULETTE since it contains an obvious misspelling of this mark, where the “o” has been
replaced with a “p”. See section 1.9 of the WIPO Overview 3.0.
Furthermore, the generic Top-level Domain (“gTLD”) “.com” is a standard registration requirement and as
such is disregarded under the first element confusing similarity test. ...
2023-01-13 - Case Details
First, Complainant relied in part on two federal trademark applications, representing that “[b]oth applications
are currently pending”. Complaint p. 7. This argument was factually misleading because Complainant did
not disclose that it filed an “Express Abandonment” of the standard character application on the very same
day that it filed the UDRP Complaint with the Center. ...
2023-01-13 - Case Details
The Complainant is a member of Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 Index, and its common stock is traded on the
New York Stock Exchange under the symbol EFX. ...
2022-12-23 - Case Details
Headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia (United States), Complainant operates or has investments in 24 countries
in North America, Central and South America, Europe and the Asia Pacific Region.
Complainant is a member of Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 Index and its common stock is traded on the New
Your Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the symbol EFX.
...
2022-12-22 - Case Details
As also explained in section 2.13.2 of the WIPO Overview 3.0, “[p]anels
are generally not prepared to accept merely conclusory or wholly unsupported allegations of illegal activity,
including counterfeiting, even when the respondent is in default. ...
2023-11-13 - Case Details
Furthermore, the use of a domain name which intentionally trades on the fame of another and suggests
affiliation with the trademark owner cannot constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services (Madonna
Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”, WIPO Case No. D2000-0847; AB Electrolux v.
Handi Sofian, Service Electrolux Lampung, WIPO Case No. ...
2024-01-08 - Case Details
In this
regard, the Panel refers to the WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.1.4, which states “[p]anels have consistently
found that the mere registration of a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar (particularly domain
names comprising typos or incorporating the mark plus a descriptive term) to a famous or widely-known
trademark by an unaffiliated entity can by itself create a presumption of bad faith.” ...
2024-01-05 - Case Details
Furthermore, the use of a domain name which intentionally trades on the fame of another and suggests
affiliation with the trademark owner cannot constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services (Madonna
Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”, WIPO Case No. D2000-0847; AB Electrolux v.
Handi Sofian, Service Electrolux Lampung, WIPO Case No. ...
2024-01-05 - Case Details
In 2022, the Complainant’s total worldwide revenue was approximately USD 27.3 billion, and it ranked
number 129 in the Fortune 500 Companies list. The Complainant is a member of the S&P 500 and has
around 14,500 employees worldwide. The Complainant carries out its business under the name and
trademark GILEAD, which it claims is well-known for pharmaceutical products and medical information
services. ...
2023-11-03 - Case Details
Additionally, according to
WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.13.1, “[p]anels have categorially held that use of a domain name for illegal
activity (e.g., ...distribution of malware...) can never confer rights or legitimate interests on a respondent”.
...
2023-10-23 - Case Details
In this regard, the Panel refers to the WIPO Overview 3.0, section
3.1.4, which states “[p]anels have consistently found that the mere registration of a domain name that is
identical or confusingly similar (particularly domain names comprising typos or incorporating the mark plus a
descriptive term) to a famous or widely-known trademark by an unaffiliated entity can by itself create a
presumption of bad faith.” ...
2023-03-30 - Case Details
- The Complainant is listed on both the National Stock Exchange of India (NSE) and the Bombay Stock
Exchange (BSE) and is present on several indices including the NSE’s Nifty 500 and the S&P BSE
500.
- The Complainant claims to have coined, adopted and started using the mark/expression ZENSAR in
2001 in respect of a wide range of products and services. ...
2023-03-08 - Case Details
For example, panels have generally declined to find respondent rights or
legitimate interests in a domain name on the basis of a corresponding trade mark registration where the
overall circumstances demonstrate that such trade mark was obtained primarily to circumvent the application
of the UDRP or otherwise prevent the complainant’s exercise of its rights (even if only in a particular
jurisdiction) (WIPO Overview 3.0 at section 2.12.2).
In Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”, WIPO Case No. D2000-0847, the
panel held as follows:
“However, it would be a mistake to conclude that mere registration of a trademark creates a legitimate
interest under the Policy…To establish cognizable rights, the overall circumstances should
demonstrate that the registration was obtained in good faith for the purpose of making bona fide use of
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/decisions/html/2000/d2000-0847.html
page 5
the mark in the jurisdiction where the mark is registered, and not obtained merely to circumvent the
application of the Policy.”
...
2023-03-20 - Case Details
In this regard, the Panel refers to the WIPO
Overview 3.0, section 3.1.4, which states “[p]anels have consistently found that the mere registration of a
domain name that is identical or confusingly similar (particularly domain names comprising typos or
incorporating the mark plus a descriptive term) to a famous or widely-known trademark by an unaffiliated
entity can by itself create a presumption of bad faith.” ...
2023-03-20 - Case Details
In this regard, the Panel refers to the WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.1.4, which states “[p]anels have
consistently found that the mere registration of a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar
(particularly domain names comprising typos or incorporating the mark plus a descriptive term) to a famous
or widely-known trademark by an unaffiliated entity can by itself create a presumption of bad faith”.
...
2024-02-19 - Case Details
The Parties
The Complainant is Aitch Group Limited, United Kingdom, represented by S&P Legal, United Kingdom.
The Respondent is Filip Sazavsky, Czech Republic.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...
2023-07-27 - Case Details
The Respondent’s
registration and use of the Disputed Domain Names indicate that such registration and use had been done
for the specific purpose of trading on the name and reputation of the Complainant and its BREITLING Mark.
See Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”, WIPO Case No. D2000-0847
(“[t]he only plausible explanation for Respondent’s actions appears to be an intentional effort to trade upon
the fame of Complainant’s name and mark for commercial gain”).
...
2023-07-21 - Case Details
The Parties
The Complainant is Freeman Holding, LLC, United States of America (“United States”), represented by
Vedder Price P. C., United States.
The Respondent is Elle Lively, United States.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...
2023-07-06 - Case Details