The Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s domain
name , with the only distinction being that the Respondent has omitted the letter “p” from the
disputed domain name. In the Complainant’s view, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for
commercial gain, Internet users to its website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s
business.
...While an intentional misspelling of the Complainant’s trademark by the Respondent seems unlikely under the
circumstances of this case, it is conceivable that the average Internet user could recognize the
Complainant’s trademark SIPCHEM in the disputed domain name () by overlooking the
missing letter “p”. Accordingly, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s
trademark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2024-09-26 - Case Details
page 3
Paragraph 10(e) of the Rules states that a “[p]anel shall decide a request by a Party to consolidate multiple
domain name disputes in accordance with the Policy and these Rules.” Paragraph 10(c) of the Rules
provides, in relevant part, that “the [p]anel shall ensure that the administrative proceeding takes place with
due expedition.” Section 4.11.2 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions,
Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), summarizes the consensus view of UDRP panels on the consolidation
of multiple respondents and provides that where a complaint is filed against multiple respondents, panels
consider whether the domain names or corresponding websites are subject to common control and whether
the consolidation would be fair and equitable to all parties.
...
2024-12-03 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complaint mentions that the disputed domain name comprises the Complainant’s trademarks BNP PARIBAS in their entirety, with the deletion of the letter “p”, being a classic case of typosquatting.
According to the Complainant, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its registered trademarks, since it contains an obvious misspelling of the trademark BNP PARIBAS, in addition of the suffix “.co”, which does not prevent the likelihood of confusion between the disputed domain name and the Complainant’s trademarks.
...Thus, a domain name that blatantly reproduces such a well-known mark simply deleting a letter “p” is suggestive of the registrant’s bad faith. It is not conceivable that the Respondent would not have been aware of the Complainant’s services and its trademark rights at the time of the registration of the disputed domain name.
...
2021-08-31 - Case Details
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Equinor ASA v. Elvis P Reyes
Case No. D2020-1996
1. The Parties
The Complainant is Equinor ASA, Norway, represented by Valea AB, Sweden.
The Respondent is Elvis P Reyes, United States of America.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameSilo, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...
2020-09-29 - Case Details
The Panel finds that consolidation is proper in this case. Paragraph 10(e) of the Rules states that a “[p]anel shall decide a request by a Party to consolidate multiple domain name disputes in accordance with the Policy and these Rules”. Paragraph 10(c) of the Rules provides, in relevant part, that “the [p]anel shall ensure that the administrative proceeding takes place with due expedition”. Section 4.11.2 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”) summarizes the consensus view of UDRP panels on the consolidation of multiple respondents and provides that where a complaint is filed against multiple respondents, panels consider whether the domain names or corresponding websites are subject to common control, and whether the consolidation would be fair and equitable to all parties.
...
2021-01-13 - Case Details
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
2703203 Manitoba Inc. v. W P, The Cloud Corp
Case No. D2018-1254
1. The Parties
The Complainant is 2703203 Manitoba Inc. of Winnipeg, Canada, represented by Jenny J. Liu Law Office, United States of America ("United States").
The Respondent is W P, The Cloud Corp of George Town, Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands, Overseas Territory of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ("United Kingdom").
2. ...
2018-07-25 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent's default on December 5, 2017.
The Center appointed Thomas P. Pinansky as the sole panelist in this matter on December 12, 2017. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Disputed Domain Name be transferred to the Complainant.
Thomas P. Pinansky
Sole Panelist
Date: December 21, 2017...
2018-01-04 - Case Details
Die Gesuchstellerin 2 ist Eigentümerin der folgenden schweizerischen Markenregistrierungen:
- Marke ECOMEDIA Nr. P-499914, in den Klassen 16 und 42, seit dem 21. Mai 2002
- Marke E-SUPPLIES E-BUSINESS BY ECOMEDIA Nr. P-477097, in den Klassen 16 und 42, seit dem 4. September 2000.
Die Gesuchsgegnerin ist seit dem 30. ...
2017-10-27 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent's default on September 26, 2017.
The Center appointed Thomas P. Pinansky as the sole panelist in this matter on October 17, 2017. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Disputed Domain Name be transferred to the Complainant.
Thomas P. Pinansky
Sole Panelist
Date: October 31, 2017...
2017-11-14 - Case Details
The disputed domain name incorporates the Complainant’s trademark SHOPSTYLE in its entirety with an additional letter “p” and the country code Top-Level Domain “.eu”, which may be disregarded for the purposes of assessing confusing similarity.
...There is no plausible explanation for the double “P” other than “typosquatting”.
As reminded in section 3.1.1 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (WIPO Overview 3.0):
“Panels 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.”
...
2018-11-09 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent's default on June 18, 2014.
The Center appointed Thomas P. Pinansky as the sole panelist in this matter on June 24, 2014. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain names , and be transferred to the Complainant.
Thomas P. Pinansky
Sole Panelist
Date: July 8, 2014...
2014-07-17 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default.
The Center appointed William P. Knight as the sole panelist in this matter on May 13, 2014. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name be transferred to the Complainant.
William P. Knight
Sole Panelist
Date: May 23, 2014...
2014-06-05 - Case Details
Accordingly,
the Center notified the Respondent’s default on May 21, 2003.
The Center appointed Howard P. Knopf as the sole Panel in this matter on June 4, 2003.
The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy
and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name
be transferred to the Complainant.
Howard P. Knopf
Sole Panelist
Dated: June 18, 2003
1. Unregistered or common law trademarks
may also form the basis of a Complaint. ...
2003-07-01 - Case Details
This entitles the Administrative Panel to draw any such inferences from such default as it considers appropriate pursuant to Paragraph 14(b) of the Rules (see e.g. WIPO Case Nos. D2000-0009, p. 6 or D2000-0867, p. 6).
It is the Sole Panelist’s finding that the Complainant has established that the trademark "LE GRAND LIVRE DU MOIS" has been known in France for quite a while in its field of operation. ...
2001-03-30 - Case Details
- Commencing in March, 1998, Respondent was engaged by a professional medical services client in San Francisco, California, U.S.A. to design and program a medical billing system as an e-commerce solution for the transmission of billings to insurance companies and government agencies (Response p. 3).
- While the domain name has not been placed in use, Respondent subsequently has developed an e-commerce process management system and is currently engaged in or seeking business with several vertical markets, including the medical and pharmaceutical industries. ...Moreover, the Respondent itself states it currently has no use at all for the domain name (Response p. 4).
The Panel finds the Respondent has no legitimate rights or interests in the domain name.
...
2001-06-19 - Case Details
At first blush the two Respondents, INSS and Allessandra's, might appear to be two different entities, but the Complainant contends all three of the disputed domain names link to pornographic websites (Complaint, p.7). For the purposes of this proceeding, then, the Panel agrees with the Complainant that the Respondents may be treated as the same entity and in this Decision they will be referred to as the "Respondent".
...Tony Alessandra also is known as Alessandra through the website at the domain name , but there is scant evidence to support this contention (Complaint p.7). The evidence produced, particularly Complainant's Annex 7, leads the Panel to conclude the Complainant has service mark rights in his name Dr. ...
2001-07-16 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center provided notice of the Respondent’s default on January 29, 2004.
The Center appointed Thomas P. Pinansky as the sole panelist in this matter on February 17, 2004. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy
and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the Domain Name
be transferred to the Complainant.
Thomas P. Pinansky
Sole Panelist
Date: March 5, 2004...
2004-03-10 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on November 25, 2003.
The Center appointed Thomas P. Pinansky as the Sole Panelist in this matter on December 2, 2003. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name, be transferred to the Complainant.
Thomas P. Pinansky
Sole Panelist
Dated: December 15, 2003...
2004-01-22 - Case Details
In this Panel's assessment, the present case needs to be distinguished from previous - though not binding - cases decided under the UDRP, such as Aspen Holdings Inc. v. Christian P. Vandendorpe,
WIPO Case No. D2009-1160, , and Aspen Holdings Inc. v. Rick Natsch, Potrero Media Corporation,
WIPO Case No. D2009-0776, .
Aspen Holdings Inc. v. Christian P. Vandendorpe,
WIPO Case No. D2009-1160, , dealt with an identical second level domain name and the same Complainant, and resulted in the transfer of the domain name . ...
2010-06-11 - Case Details
Respondents are:
24game, Kyrkogatan 14, Vetlanda, se 574 32, SE ("24game") (Complaint, Paragraph 6, p. 2)
2. Domain Names and Registrar
The domain name in issue, the registrant, the date of registration, and status of the domain name according to Network Solutions, Inc. are:
24game.com, 24game, November 26, 1997, Hold
Network Solutions, Inc. ...See screen print from Network Solutions’ database at Attachment P. See also Declaration of Denise I. Mroz at Attachment N.
(xi) On April 14, 2000, Complainant attempted to contact Respondent via express mail. ...
2000-06-29 - Case Details