It
argues that a number of WIPO Administrative Panel decisions have concluded that
"typosquatting" results in an identical or confusingly similar domain
name and is also evidence of bad faith. ...Typosquatting" constitutes evidence of bad faith, but it falls short
of bad faith in itself. As a result, the Panel is reluctant to endorse
Complainant’s statement that "Respondent’s typosquatting is evidence of
bad faith in itself" [emphasis added]. ...
2003-05-28 - Case Details
The Complainant characterizes the Respondent’s conduct as “a classic case of typosquatting”, establishing bad faith registration and use, and requests the transfer of the disputed domain name.
...WE MEAN BUSINESS (collectively referred to as the “SAM’S CLUB marks”).
2 “Typosquatting”
involves the intentional registration and use of a domain name that is a common
misspelling of a distinctive mark. ...
2005-09-05 - Case Details
Respondent is engaged in a practice commonly referred to as “typosquatting”, which involves the registration of common misspellings of famous marks and the diversion of Internet users who misspell famous marks for commercial gain. Typosquatting has been recognized by previous Panels as evidence of bad faith with regard to Policy 4(a)(iii).
...
2005-06-10 - Case Details
Such use, it submits, is not a legitimate purpose but is an example of typosquatting. It submits that numerous panels have previously found that typosquatting does not constitute a legitimate use of a mark, and is "the obverse of a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of a domain name." ...Complainant also contends that Respondent's bad faith registration and use of the Disputed Domain Name are also established as this is an example of typosquatting, as "traveosity" is simply a misspelling of Complainant's TRAVELOCITY mark. A "finding of 'typosquatting' is sufficient to establish use and registration in bad faith." ...
2016-04-18 - Case Details
S&S Enterprises Ltd,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0802.
Indeed, this is clearly a "typosquatting" case where the disputed domain name is a slight misspelling of a registered trademark to divert Internet traffic. ...D2002-1011). The Expert determines that the typosquatting nature of the disputed domain name provides a further ground of bad faith in registration and use.
...
2014-09-04 - Case Details
D2005-0444 (Finding serial typosquatting is evidence of bad faith); Longs Drug Stores California, Inc. v. Shep Dog,
WIPO Case No. D2004-1069 (Finding typosquatting to be evidence of bad faith domain name registration); Lexar Media, Inc. v. Michael Huang,
WIPO Case No. D2004-1039 (“Typosquatting has been held under the Policy to be evidence of bad faith registration of a domain name”); Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2013-09-11 - Case Details
The Complainant maintains notwithstanding the Respondent’s typosquatting that the LATHAM & WATKINS mark is recognizable in the disputed domain name and accordingly satisfies the first element under the Policy. ...The record in this case makes clear beyond cavil that the Respondent engaged in typosquatting, registering and using the disputed domain name to impersonate one of the Complainant’s attorneys in an attempted fraud.
...
2021-09-28 - Case Details
In view of Complainant’s registration for the NEWMAN’S OWN trademark, Respondent’s incorporation of that trademark in its entirety in the disputed domain name, and Respondent’s clear attempt at typosquatting on the NEWMAN’S OWN trademark, the Panel concludes that Complainant has established the first element of the Policy.
...XC2,
WIPO Case No. D2005-0444 (finding that the practice of “typosquatting”, of itself, is evidence of the bad faith registration of a domain name). The Panel concurs with this approach. ...
2021-01-26 - Case Details
The
Complainant contends that the Respondent’s typosquatting shows that they are clearly aware of the
Complainant and were attempting to leverage it for their own gain. ...Further, the disputed domain name should be considered a case of typosquatting. Here, the disputed
domain name is identical to the Complainant’s mark, except that a letter “i” was replaced with the a lower
case “L.” ...
2024-09-30 - Case Details
De même, le Requérant soutient à bon droit que le “e” ajouté au mot “epargne” dans le nom de domaine
litigieux correspond à une démarche de “typosquatting” du Défendeur et établit le risque de confusion créé
pour les internautes; le nom de domaine litigieux incorporant pour le surplus la marque du Requérant (v.
...case=D2020-0967
page 4
que la pratique de “typosquatting” du Défendeur dans le nom de domaine litigieux, dirigeant, un temps, vers
un site imitant le site officiel du Requérant, montre que le Défendeur n’avait aucun intérêt légitime à l’emploi
du nom de domaine litigieux. ...
2022-06-29 - Case Details
The Panel agrees that this appears to be a classic instance of “typosquatting,” and finds that this small distinction is insufficient to avoid a finding of confusing similarity.
...D2005-0444. The Panel agrees that Respondent’s typosquatting in this case demonstrates bad faith.
Respondent’s apparent serial effort to engage in typosquatting to exploit the brands and marks of others adds weight to the evidence that the disputed domain name before the Panel in the present proceeding was registered in bad faith. ...
2018-12-14 - Case Details
The Panel considers this to be a clear case of typosquatting. The Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Trade Mark. The Complainant succeeds on the first element of the Policy.
...As previously mentioned, this is clear a case of typosquatting, where the Disputed Domain Name is identical to the Trade Mark save for the addition of one letter. ...
2019-01-30 - Case Details
As set forth above, Respondent has engaged in typosquatting by making a small variation to Complainant’s IQOS mark and Complainant’s “www.iqos.com” website, which might result from the Internet user’s inadvertent error in typing Complainant’s domain name. Typosquatting is considered “virtually per se registration and use in bad faith” Go Daddy Software, Inc. v. ...
2018-08-10 - Case Details
The Complainants submit that the Respondents clearly aim to target Internet users making typographical errors and are engaged in typosquatting. They submit that "typosquatting is virtually per se registration and use in bad faith" see Go Daddy Software, Inc. v. Daniel Hadani,
WIPO Case No. D2002-0568 and "Typosquatting is presumptive – well nigh conclusive – evidence of registration and use in bad faith" – see Classmates Online, Inc. v. ...
2011-07-01 - Case Details
There is little doubt that this constitutes typosquatting, a practice designed to take wrongful advantage of possible misspellings of a third party trademark. Not every domain name that happens to contain a slight deviation in the spelling of a trademark of another will amount to typosquatting. However where, as here, there seems little reason for the registration of the Domain Name other than to take advantage of the Complainant’s somewhat unique mark and Internet users’ potential to misspell that mark when looking for the genuine online presence of the Complainant, a finding of typosquatting is inevitable. ...
2012-08-20 - Case Details
Further, the addition of the letter “e” in the disputed Domain Name represents typosquatting. This close misspelling renders the Domain Name confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademark. ...“The act of ‘typosquatting’ or registering a domain name that is a common misspelling of a mark in which the party has rights has often been recognized as evidence of bad faith registration and use.” ...
2006-05-17 - Case Details
Typosquatting is also an indication of a lack of rights or
legitimate interests.
The Respondent has not answered this Complaint or rebutted the prima facie case evidenced by the
Complainant as presented herein.
...The Respondent’s conduct, impersonating a complainant by use of the Complainant’s mark in the Domain
Name in a fraudulent phishing attempt is disruptive and evinces bad faith registration and use in bad faith.
This appears to be a case of typosquatting, using a url which is very similar to the Complainant to divert
traffic. Typosquatting itself is evidence of relevant bad faith registration and use and also indicates the
Respondent had knowledge of the Complainant and its rights.
...
2023-09-08 - Case Details
This is confusing and competing and is not bona fide use or legitimate non commercial fair use.
The Domain Name appears to be a typosquatting registration. Typosquatting is also an indication of a lack of rights or legitimate interests.
...Registered and Used in Bad Faith
The Domain Name seeks to take advantage of the situation where Internet users may make a typographical error. Typosquatting itself is evidence of relevant bad faith registration and use and indicates the Respondent had knowledge of the Complainant and its rights.
...
2021-12-02 - Case Details
The Respondent’s registration and use of the Domain Name is typosquatting, and this does not constitute a legitimate use. The Respondent has not replied to the Complainant’s cease and desist letter.
...The Respondent’s registration and use of the Domain Name looks indeed like a classic case of typosquatting. Typosquatting is not legitimate use of a trademark.
The Panel finds that the Complainant has made out a prima facie case. ...
2019-05-24 - Case Details
The term “typosquatting”—as a portmanteau of “typographical error” and “cybersquatting”—presumes an opportunistic act on the part of a domain name registrant to prey on a user’s accidental mistyping of another party’s mark. ...Similarly, one intending to type “w” would not be expected to mistakenly type “v” twice in succession.
So this case is not an example of pure “typosquatting”.
But we need not detain ourselves any longer on semantics. This case resolves the same way, whether one calls it “typosquatting” or more accurately labels it what it probably is—plain old intent to deceive. ...
2016-09-30 - Case Details