If the disputed domain name had been a dictionary term, the starting point for the Panel would have been
that “[…] generally speaking, panels have accepted that aggregating and holding domain names (usually for
resale) consisting e.g., of acronyms, dictionary words, common phrases, or unique/catchy or memorable
terms (alone or in combination) can be bona fide and is not per se illegitimate under the UDRP where the
respondent can show that the purpose of the registration was not to target a trademark”. WIPO Overview
3.1, section 2.1. However, “[p]anels have held that merely registering a domain name comprised of a
dictionary word or phrase would not by itself automatically confer rights or legitimate interests on the
respondent. ...In considering the overall facts and
circumstances, “[p]anels also tend to look at factors such as the status and fame of the relevant mark and
whether the respondent has registered and legitimately used other domain names containing dictionary
words or phrases in connection with the respective dictionary meaning”. ...
2026-03-26 - Case Details
Indeed, the formal letter seeking undertakings from the Complainants’ representatives, W P Thompson and Co, dated February 27, 2002, says it is sent on behalf of the First Complainant. It would appear to the Respondent, however, that such trade mark registrations as are annexed to the Complaint are all in the name of the Second Complainant.
...However, The Respondent contends that the response on behalf of the First Complainant through its patent attorney, W P Thompson and Co dated February 27, 2002, failed to deal with any of the issues raised in the letter of February 19, 2002, and offered a "take it or leave it" £220, representing what that firm considered to be the "direct costs" of registering and maintaining the domain names. ...
2002-06-03 - Case Details
Buffalo Wu, CA-00-00178-A (memorandum decision at p. 8)
Twenty-two UDRP decisions
involving the Complainant’s mark have been issued by WIPO Panels, all of which
have required the transfer of all involved domain names to the Complainant.
...s mark except for the addition of two non-distinguishing
letters, ‘p’ and ‘s,’ to the end of the YAHOO! mark. Because the Domain Name
fully incorporates the YAHOO! mark, and because the pronunciation of ‘yahoops’
is virtually identical to the pronunciation of ‘yahoo,’ Internet users could
easily confuse the two names."
...
2002-07-08 - Case Details
Westminster Window and General Cleaners Ltd. (1946) 63 RPC 39, at p 42, per Lord Simonds). As his Lordship said (1946) 63 RPC, at p 43, the possibility of blunders by members of the public will always be present when names consist of descriptive words - "So long as descriptive words are used by two traders as part of their respective trade names, it is possible that some members of the public will be confused whatever the differentiating words may be." ...
2003-05-02 - Case Details
Furthermore, the use of a domain name which intentionally trades on the fame of another and suggests
af f iliation with the trademark owner cannot constitute a bona fide of fering 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. ...
2023-12-15 - 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. ...
2023-12-08 - Case Details
The Complainant is the owner of various registrations for the trademark CENTURY, including for example:
- Switzerland trademark registration number P-375224 for the word mark CENTURY, registered on March
14, 1990 for watches in International Class 14; and
- United States trademark registration number 1386743 for a stylized word mark CENTURY, registered on
March 18, 1986 for chronometers in International Class 14.
...
2024-01-03 - Case Details
See also O2 Worldwide Limited v. Domains
By Proxy, LLC / Rodrigo P Braga, Ypse IT Solutions, WIPO Case No. D2019-0124.
Based on the available record, the Panel finds the first element of the Policy has been established.
...
2024-04-22 - 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.” ...
2023-09-14 - 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
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/text.jsp?...
2023-11-01 - 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.”
...
2023-09-29 - Case Details
El
nombre de dominio en disputa se utiliza para alojar un sitio web que incumple los requisitos de la prueba de
Oki Data,2 ya que se hace pasar por la Demandante, sin incluir información sobre la falta de relación entre
las Partes y tratando de engañar a los consumidores.
1 Véanse, entre otras, IM Production v. 50448207 Qiang Pa [ . . . ] @live.com, 1290044 Q P [ . . . ] @live.com, Caso OMPI No.
D2012-0112; IM Production v. Ted Chen, Caso OMPI No. D2014-1486; IM Production v. yansheng zhang, GNAME.COM PTE. ...
2024-02-16 - 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 name and reputation 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”).
...
2024-02-14 - Case Details
As explained at 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 trademark by an unaffiliated entity can by itself create a
presumption of bad faith”. ...
2024-03-01 - Case Details
Il Sito Web utilizzava in modo prominente il marchio
INSIDE e portava una notizia “copyright 2025@INSIDE” seguito da “CALZATURIFICIO GRESIL SRL Via A.
Diaz, 80028, Grumo Nevano (NA) P. IVA: IT07514601215 +39 380 465 74 79 [...]@insideshop.eu”.
Secondo il Ricorrente, il Resistente e il fondatore di questa società.
...
2025-05-20 - Case Details
Additionally, section 3.2.1 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 provides that “[p]articular circumstances panels may
take into account in assessing whether the respondent’s registration of a domain name is in bad faith
include: (i) the nature of the domain name (e.g., a typo of a widely-known mark, or a domain name
incorporating the complainant’s mark plus an additional term such as a descriptive or geographic term, or
one that corresponds to the complainant’s area of activity or natural zone of expansion); [...] ...
2025-01-14 - 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.” ...
2025-01-14 - Case Details
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/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
page 5
Additionally, section 3.2.1 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 provides that “[p]articular circumstances panels may
take into account in assessing whether the respondent’s registration of a domain name is in bad faith
include: (i) the nature of the domain name (e.g., a typo of a widely-known mark, or a domain name
incorporating the complainant’s mark plus an additional term such as a descriptive or geographic term, or
one that corresponds to the complainant’s area of activity or natural zone of expansion); [...] ...
2024-11-28 - Case Details
DBR2023-0013; e Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft e Volkswagen do Brasil Indústria de Veículos
Automotores Ltda. v. P. C. J., Caso OMPI No. DBR2015-0005.
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?case=DBR2023-0013
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?...
2025-01-17 - Case Details
Additionally, section 3.2.1 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 provides that “[p]articular circumstances panels may
take into account in assessing whether the respondent’s registration of a domain name is in bad faith
include: (i) the nature of the domain name (e.g., a typo of a widely-known mark, or a domain name
incorporating the complainant’s mark plus an additional term such as a descriptive or geographic term, or
one that corresponds to the complainant’s area of activity or natural zone of expansion); [...] ...
2024-12-16 - Case Details