He argues further that he had already registered the domain name
before the Complainants had begun to use their slogan "This is Adam King",
and that even the Complainants’ use of another related slogan "This is
NOT Adam King" began after this time: Response, p 12. Finally, he argues
that the Complainant filed its ADAM KING trade mark applications after this
date, asserting that "[u]nder Malaysian trade mark law, a later application
cannot be a bar to an earlier application/registration" (referring here,
apparently, to the earlier domain name registration): Response, p 13. ...Finally, he points to certain inaccuracies relating to the Complainant’s
description of the sequence for the flash movie that was at "whoisadamking.com":
Response, p 15..
6. Discussion and Findings
This is an interesting case that has been the subject of well prepared and
detailed submissions on both sides. ...
2003-02-03 - Case Details
La Partie adverse est Marc Baertschi de Corcelles-p-Payerne, Suisse.
2. Le nom de domaine
Le différend concerne le nom de domaine .
3. Rappel de la procédure
Une demande a été déposée par Cartier International S. ...Quant aux conséquences de l’absence d’usage, la situation juridique est incertaine (Müller, Kollisionen von Kennzeichen, Bern 2010, p. 296). Entre autres auteurs, Buri estime que la situation est pareille au droit des marques: le titulaire du nom peut procéder contre le titulaire du nom de domaine si un usage en violation du droit au nom est imminent (Buri, Die Verwechselbarkeit von Internet Domain Names, Berne 2000, p. 129). ...
2015-07-01 - Case Details
Please let me know so that I can update you further”. On June 21, 2022, “P” sent another email to the
customer, containing a DocuSign box marked “[P] sent you a Statement to review and sign”, with a button
marked “REVIEW DOCUMENT” that would have led the customer to an HTTPS address.
...It would
appear the customer was actually confused by this email because they replied to “P” on June 1, 2022,
saying “Can you please update me today if possible?” “P” replied on June 29, 2022, with an email that said
“Please copy and paste the following link into your browser to view statement”, with a link to an HTTPS
address that was the same as the one associated with the DocuSign box described in the paragraph above.
...
2022-09-01 - Case Details
The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name <p-plein.com> (the “Domain Name”) is registered with Hosting Ukraine LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. Procedural History
The Complaint in Russian was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on July 7, 2017. ...The Complainant argues that the addition of the initial letter “p” in the Domain Name increases the likelihood of confusion for consumers because the letter “p” is the initial letter of the other Complainant’s trademarks and could be easily associated with the Complainant’s design trademark. ...
2017-09-11 - Case Details
- Respondent attempted to sell back the domain name to Complainant for financial gain (Complaint p.8).
- Remedy Requested: Complainant requests that the disputed domain name, , be turned over to Complainant.
6. ...In their documents (Exhibits G, I and J, Complaint p.7, Response p.1), both Respondent and Complainant allude to the public actually having been confused.
...
2000-05-17 - Case Details
The [p]anel concludes that the [r]espondent’s domain name is confusingly similar to the [c]omplainant’s trademarks”.
...The [p]anel therefore finds that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith”.
...
2011-03-03 - Case Details
There must nevertheless be indications that the domain name is
intended to be used for goods or services that are identical with or similar to those claimed by the trademark
in question (cf. Buri, in SIWR III/2, Basel 2005, p. 364; BSK MSCHG-Isler, Art. 13 N 28). However, the
Claimant has not put forward any evidence to that effect.
...For instance, Buri considers that the mere registration of a domain
name cannot entail a risk of confusion under the law of name rights (Buri, Die Verwechselbarkeit von Internet
Domain Names, Berne 2000, p. 129), while Joller is of the contrary view (Joller, in Bettinger, Handbuch des
Domainrechts, Köln/München 2008, p. 908). ...
2024-10-01 - Case Details
The transfer was made for Mr. P. Caroll, Black Cat, so Shop-Shop-Shop could
fore fill (sic) the request made by Mr. P. Caroll to manage the domain name,
pickfordsremovals.com, on a different server other than the one the domain name
was currently running on.
...P. Caroll of our receipt of the dispute case and
advised on changing the ownership of the domain name".
...
2001-07-13 - Case Details
Sökande
Sökanden är L.M.,Sverige.
2. Innehavare
Innehavaren är P. W., Kina.
3. Domännamn och Förfarandet
Alternativt Tvistlösningsförfarande avseende domännamnet .
...M. var under tiden den 17 mars 2013 till den 17 april 2018 registrerad som innehavare till domännamnet .
P. W. registrerade den 3 juli 2018 domännamnet.
L. M. inledde därefter ett alternativt tvistlösningsförfarande avseende domännamnet.
5. ...
2020-04-03 - Case Details
Id., at para. 3, p. 1. Consequently,
the Administrative Panel ordered the Respondent to transfer the Contested Domain
Names to Complainant. ...Nuclear Marshmallows, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0003, para. 7.2, p. 4 (Administrative Panel Decision, February 18, 2000);
Parfums Christian Dior v. 1 Netpower, Inc., WIPO
Case No. ...
2002-08-19 - Case Details
The disputed domain name was registered on February 19, 2021, and presently does not resolve to an active webpage, but was used in connection with a webpage displaying the Complainant’s trademark and products, claiming to be “part of the P&G family”, purportedly giving away the Complainant’s products in Vietnam.
5. Parties’ Contentions
A. ...The Complainant furthermore states that ORAL-B has been a subsidiary of P&G since 2006 and that P&G and the Complainant hold the domain name, extensively using the ORAL-B trademark in connection with dental care products and related services.
...
2021-09-27 - Case Details
Innehavare
Innehavaren är Team-Mate Holding Limited, P. P., Cypern, företrädd av Juristfirman R. V. J AB, Sverige.
3. Domännamn och Förfarandet
Alternativt Tvistlösningsförfarande avseende domännamnet .
...Innehavaren av domännamnet är Team-Mate Holding Limited, P. P., Cypern.
Det omtvistade domännamnet registrerades den 21 september 2004.
5. Yrkanden
Sökanden har begärt att domännamnet ska överföras till Sökanden.
...
2019-07-03 - Case Details
Jeffrey EManley, User User,
Johnnie R Hutchinson, Hal P Bickel, Douglas T Bates, Frank Bellavia, 朱凌晴
(zz zz), 沈静枫 (zz zz), 钱若菱 (Shengjie Zhuang), Patricia AGonzalez,
Cameron Whiteley, Abc Name, Vernon S Mercado, 卫安荷 (Martin Parker)
Case No. ...These circumstances
indicate that the disputed domain names registered in the names of Hal P Bickel and Johnnie R Hutchinson
or their associated websites, or both, are under common control.
...
2024-11-25 - Case Details
Third, in both DFO and Saint Gobain, the defendants decided not to use the domain names for their original purpose. See DFO, at p. 4; Saint Gobain, at p. 4. Here, Respondents have at all times maintained, operated, and intend to use their domain name for commentary.
...See Bridgestone, p. 7-8: "Save Ahmanson Ranch from Washington Mutual Development"; "Washington Mutual, America's Environmental Enemy").
...
2001-02-06 - Case Details
The registration of the domain must therefore [have] been made in bad faith” (p. 6 of the request). Further, the domain is under construction since 2001, which would show that the Respondent has no legitimate interest in it. ...He now seems to offer in his response of October 19, 2009 (p.3 § 5) the transfer of the domain name for CHF 10'000 without any consultancy services. He mentions that the “value of the domain name to the [C]laimant seems to be negligible” (p. 3 § 5 in fine).
...
2009-12-14 - Case Details
Domain Admin, Privacy Protection Service INC d/b/a PrivacyProtect.org; Elizabeth Davis; Samantha Rampin; and P de Ree
Case No. D2017-0177
1. The Parties
The Complainant is Mou Limited of London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (“UK”), represented by SILKA Law AB, Sweden.
...In the present case, it is clear and indisputable that the disputed domain names , , and were registered by the same Respondent, namely P de Ree.
In addition, the Complainant states the following:
all disputed domain names were registered through the same registrar;
- the disputed domain names and resolve to websites that are identical to each other in content;
- the disputed domain names and share the same IP address (in Moscow, Russian Federation);
- the registrant of the disputed domain names , , and , P de Ree, has previously been involved in a UDRP proceeding involving the Complainant (see Mou Limited v. ...
2017-04-03 - Case Details
see Complaint, Paragraph 12, section 2 on p.9)
Bad Faith
The Complainant alleges that the domain name was registered and used in bad faith, with the sole purpose of intentionally attempting to attract Internet users to his website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the Complainant’s trademarks.
...see Complaint, Paragraph 12, section 3.4., p.10)
The Complainant deduces the bad faith use from the fact that the Respondent (i) did not answer the letters and emails sent by the Complainant’s counsel, (ii) tried to evade the Complainant’s request by changing Registrars, and (iii) renewed the domain name despite the Complainant’s warning letters (see Complaint, Paragraph 12, section 3.5., p.10).
...
2002-08-28 - Case Details
• United States trade mark PRINCIPAL FUNDS registered on January 15, 2008, under No. 3,368,181
• United States device mark (stylized “P”) registered on 15 November 2016 under No. 5,083,538.
• United States device marks consisting of a stylized “P” and PRINCIPAL registered on 1 November
2016, under Nos. 5,074,931 and 5,074,932.
The Domain Name was registered on August 26, 2022 and resolves to a website which reproduces the
PRINCIPAL word mark and the stylized “P and P PRINCIPAL marks. The website displays information on
the Complainant and purports to offer various insurance and financial services, overlapping and otherwise
similar to the services that the Complainant provides and states that it “was established in 2021 by Principal
Financial Group”. ...
2022-12-29 - Case Details
The Respondent is Michael Bader, P-1 Enterprises of Eastpointe, Michigan, USA.
2. The Domain Name(s) and Registrar(s)
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with TierraNet d/b/a DomainDiscover (the “Registrar”).
3. ...As shown in the Registrar’s WhoIs database, the Domain Name was registered on February 23, 2004, by Michael Bader of P-1 Enterprises (collectively, the “Respondent”). The Complaint explains that “P-1 Enterprises” or “P 1 Enterprises” is a fictitious name formerly used by Mr. ...
2016-08-23 - Case Details
The Panel therefore finds the Respondent's disclaimer
at the domain name website does not save the domain name from being identical
to the Complainant's mark under the Policy at 4a(i). (Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a
Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com", ICANN/WIPO
Case No. D2000-0847, October 12, 2000; DFO, Inc. v. ...Legitimate Rights or Interests
The Complainant asserts the Respondent has not been authorized to use the disputed domain name "in any way, shape or form" (Complaint p. 12). The Complainant also asserts the Respondent has no legitimate rights or interests in the disputed domain name.
...
2001-06-15 - Case Details