Paragraph 10(c) of the Rules requires that the administrative proceeding takes p...
The Respondent’s mailing address is in Ukraine, which is subject to an international conflict at the date of this Decision. ...
2026-03-02 - Case Details
Here, the Respondent’s registration and use of the Disputed
Domain Name indicates that such registration and use had been done for the specific purpose of trading
upon and targeting the reputation, name, mark, and goodwill of the Complainant. 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”).
...
2026-02-25 - Case Details
The Complainant employs approximately
11,000 people worldwide. It is a member of Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 Index, and its common stock is
traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the symbol EFX.
...
2022-09-14 - Case Details
The composition
of the Disputed Domain Name indicates that such registration and holding has been done for the specific
purpose of trading on the name and reputation of the Complainants and its BLUE BUFFALO 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”).
...
2022-05-05 - Case Details
Second, based on the circumstances here, the Panel concludes that Respondent’s registration and use of
the Disputed Domain Name had been done for the specific purpose of trading on the name and reputation of
the Complainant and its CARREFOUR 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”). ...
2022-04-29 - Case Details
Section 2.9 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 states
that: “[P]anels have found that the use of a domain name to host a parked page comprising PPC links does
not represent a bona fide offering where such links compete with or capitalize on the reputation and goodwill
of the complainant’s mark or otherwise mislead Internet users”. ...
2022-05-30 - Case Details
VistaPrint Technologies Ltd, WIPO Case No.
D2015-0886; and Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”, WIPO Case No.
D2000-0847).
It is acknowledged that once the Panel finds a prima facie case is made by a complainant, the burden of
production under the second element shifts to the respondent to come forward with relevant evidence
demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. ...
2022-05-27 - Case Details
This website features the Second Complainant’s logo, which
consists of a stylized form of the words “Britannia Pharmaceuticals Ltd” and the letters “b” and “p” intertwined
to create the shape of a globe.
The Complainants are the owner of numerous trade mark registrations for BRITANNIA (the “BRITANNIA
Mark”) in various jurisdictions including a United Kingdom registration, registered on September 13, 1996,
(registration number 2043054) for goods in classes 5 and 10.
...
2022-03-23 - Case Details
The Respondent’s
registration and use of the Disputed Domain Name indicate that such registration and use have been done
for the specific purpose of trading on the name and reputation of the Complainant and its WABCO 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”).
...
2022-04-21 - Case Details
Section 2.9 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 states that: “[P]anels have found that the use of a domain name to host a parked page comprising PPC links does not represent a bona fide offering where such links compete with or capitalize on the reputation and goodwill of the complainant’s mark or otherwise mislead Internet users”. ...
2022-04-19 - Case Details
The Respondent’s registration and
use of the Disputed Domain Name to impersonate the Complainant and create a mirrored, identical website
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 SAFE BANKING 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”).
...
2022-04-11 - Case Details
Moreover, as is stated in section 3.1.4 of the WIPO Overview 3.0, “[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 trade mark by an unaffiliated entity can by itself create a presumption of bad faith”.
...
2022-02-17 - Case Details
For present purposes it is sufficient to identify two of those registrations, namely:
Swiss Trademark Registration No. P-512484 OLYMPIC GAMES (words) registered on June 30, 2003
for a wide variety of goods and services in all 45 classes, including services in class 35 relating to the
promotion and sponsorship of international sporting events.
...
2022-03-03 - Case Details
D2001-1185; and contrast NP Factory Werbeagentur GmbH and Nastroje P. GmbH & Co. KG v. Demurrelt Enterprises Limited,
WIPO Case No. D2007-1858.
The Complainant has established a prima facie case that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name and thereby the burden of production shifts to the Respondent to produce evidence demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name.
...
2022-02-03 - Case Details
The Panel also notes that any registrant can list any name – real or fake – in the registrar’s database on an unverified basis and merely listing a designation with the registrar cannot by itself be the basis for a finding of rights in a domain name. See notably in this respect Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847.
The Panel finds that the Respondent has failed to produce any evidence to establish his rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name. ...
2022-01-18 - Case Details
In addition, the Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain name 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 trademark ALSTOM. 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”)
In the Panel’s view, the Complainant’s mark is famous and registration by the unrelated Respondent creates a presumption of bad faith in this case. ...
2022-03-02 - Case Details
Section 3.5 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 states that “[p]articularly with respect to ‘automatically’ generated pay-
per-click links, panels have held that a respondent cannot disclaim responsibility for content appearing on
the website associated with its domain name (nor would such links ipso facto vest the respondent with rights
or legitimate interests)”. ...
2022-03-02 - Case Details
The Respondent’s registration and use of the Disputed Domain
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
page 5
Name 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 OLYMPIC 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”).
...
2022-04-01 - Case Details
‘To conclude otherwise would mean that a Respondent could rely on intentional infringement to demonstrate a legitimate interest, an interpretation that is obviously contrary to the intent of the Policy.’” (quoting Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com",
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847)). In this case, Respondent used the disputed domain name to direct Internet users to a website intended to mimic that of Complainant, ostensibly to capitalize on misdirected Internet traffic to this imposter website. ...
2021-05-17 - Case Details
o) The registrant city is spelled “Ha Noi” for all disputed domain names.
p) The disputed domain names were registered using a gmail email address.
The Complainant requests the domain names , , , and to be added to the Complaint, as the said four domain names have been registered by the Respondent in an abusive pattern to frustrate the Complainant and the procedure. ...
2021-04-16 - Case Details