IRG Coins and Ink Source, Inc., WIPO Case No. D2000-0090; Stralfors AB v. P D S AB, WIPO Case No. D2000-0112; InfoSpace.com, Inc. v. Ofer, WIPO Case No. D2000-0075.
To quote a prior Panel decision, "[B]ecause Respondent is contributing no value-added to the Internet -- it is merely attempting to exploit a general rule of registration -- the broad community of Internet users will be better served by transferring the domain name to a party with a legitimate use for it." ...
2001-01-26 - Case Details
This of itself however does not make the domain names fair use, since there is no connection between the domain names and the subject matter of the web sites they resolve to; see The Chicago Tribune Company v. Jose P. Varkey, WIPO Case No. D2000-0133; Monty and Pat Roberts, Inc. v. J. Bartell, WIPO Case No. D2000-0300. ...
2001-02-28 - Case Details
The website features,
inter alia, promotion of staffing services for call center, medical and
technical staffing areas. (Id., para. 12.O-P & Annex 10, and Panel
visit of July 11, 2001)
Complainant (through counsel) initially contacted Respondent by letter of February
23, 2001, both in respect to its use of the name "BenchMark Jobs"
for its business operations, and in respect to the disputed domain name (Complaint,
para. 12.I & Annex 7). ...
2001-07-19 - Case Details
Dada la evidente importancia de la fecha de registro del dominio "elrincondelvago", el Panel, al amparo de una interpretación amplia de las facultades que le atribuyen los apartados 10 y 12 del Reglamento y de conformidad con la sugerencia en tal sentido del Case Manager (doc. Nº 10, p. 1ª del demandado), se dirigió a NSI para solicitar tal información. Por comunicación electrónica de 14 de septiembre de 2000, NSI respondió:
que consideraba que no era función del Panelista coadyuvar en la indagación de los hechos más allá de lo que se desprende de los escritos y pruebas aportados por las partes, que tal información no puede ofrecerla sin un procedimiento judicial de "subpoena", y que habiendo estudiado el caso no entendía el alcance y la importancia de la petición
El demandado podrá reiterar la petición con las condiciones exigidas por NSI si acude a la vía judicial, haciendo valer asimismo el contrato de servicios que le liga con esta empresa y que, parece, debiera obligarla a proporcionar a sus clientes la información que necesitan para la mejor defensa de sus derechos e intereses. ...
2000-09-22 - Case Details
IRG Coins and Ink
Source, Inc. WIPO
Case No.D2000-0090; Stralfors AB v. P D S AB, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0112; InfoSpace.com, Inc. v. Ofer, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0075.
6.13There are other
facts that provide sufficient evidence of bad faith in this case. ...
2002-01-08 - Case Details
Complainant is really asking the Panel to grant it a monopoly over the letters P-L-A-Y-B-O and U.
(ii) Complainant has not met the burden of demonstrating bad faith and Respondent has not acted with bad faith. ...
2002-03-21 - Case Details
Copies of these decisions are attached here
to at Annex P.
45. Based on the foregoing, Respondent has registered and used the domain name in bad faith."
...
2001-12-18 - Case Details
The Malaysian government has approved "FJBEN Jamin Kualiti Consultant"
as a company registration with the registration number MA0074079-P under the
Quality Management and Industrial Training Provider category. The word "Konsultant"
was changed to "Consultant" to conform to the Malay language statute
requirement for the company’s legal document. ...
2004-01-12 - Case Details
- Que es inaplicable el artículo 5.1 a) de la Ley de Marcas, por su literalidad, además de por lo establecido en la Jurisprudencia española y en la Doctrina, careciendo además el Ayuntamiento de Madrid, o sus empresas municipales, de legitimación exclusiva sobre la palabra MADRID, pues igual podrían reclamarla otros entes públicos, como la Comunidad de Madrid, p. ej.
- Que "ESMADRID" no era la única opción existente, y sosteniéndose que no ha quedado probado que los tres finalistas llegaran a la conclusión de que "ESMADRID" era una opción, poniendo en duda la validez de la documentación aportada por la demandante, insinuando que la certificación emitida por la entidad LATA LATINA es de conveniencia, y
- Que tiene interés en conservar ese dominio, ya que... ...
2003-02-19 - Case Details
The Panel is of the same view as those in the previous UDRP decisions mentioned in section 4.17 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), which held that “[p]anels have widely recognized that mere delay between the registration of a domain name and the filing of a complaint neither bars a complainant from filing such case, nor from potentially prevailing on the merits”. ...
2022-02-07 - Case Details
The Respondents’ registration and use of the Disputed Domain Names indicate that such registration and use has been done for the specific purpose of trading on and targeting the name and reputation of the Complainants and their VULKAN 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”). ...
2021-09-20 - Case Details
The Complainant is owner of several registered trademarks for MEDAXIS including:
- Swiss trademark P-480203 in class 10, having a registration date on January 12, 2001; and
- International Registration 754938 in class 10 having a registration date of March 6, 2001 and extended
to China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain, United Kingdom and the United States of America.
...
2024-08-05 - Case Details
Here, the Respondents’ registration and
use of the Disputed Domain Names 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”).
...
2024-02-29 - Case Details
Factual Background
The Complainant, whose predecessor was founded in 2009, is a Delaware (United States) corporation
whose shares have been traded on the New York Stock Exchange since May 2019 and have been included
in the S&P 500 since December 2023. The Complainant operates a technology platform that connects
consumers with independent drivers for ridesharing services and with public transportation networks. ...
2024-11-25 - Case Details
“Any of the following circumstances, in particular but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be proved based on its evaluation of all evidence presented, shall demonstrate your rights or legitimate interests to the domain name for purposes of p...
(i) before any notice to you of the dispute, your use of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or
(ii) you (as an individual, business, or other organization) have been commonly known by the domain name, even if you have acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or
(iii) you are making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue”. ...
2024-09-09 - Case Details
The 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.
...
2023-02-14 - 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.” ...
2023-11-20 - Case Details
On January 10, 2006, Complainant obtained a registration for the trademark, WIKIPEDIA, registration No.
3,040,722, from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), for “[p]roviding information in the
field of general encyclopedic knowledge via the Internet.” The registration indicates first use of the mark in
January 2001. ...
2025-07-15 - Case Details
Complainant employed approximately 14,700 employees in 22
countries as of December 31, 2024. Complainant 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. ...
2026-01-02 - Case Details
Based on the screenshots submitted as Annex E2 to the Complaint – which have not been contested by the Respondent - prior to the p...
5. Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
B. Respondent
6. Discussion and Findings
6.1. Procedural Issues
Due to the similarities of the ADR Rules and the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “UDRP”), the Panel will also take into account the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), a...
6.2. ...
2025-10-28 - Case Details