that the additional same letter (“p” in this case) is a blatant example of typosquatting thus bad faith where the spelling of a trademark has been...
2019-05-27 - Case Details
address when seeking to access Complainant’s website, and that Respondent is engaged in typosquatting. Respondent’s domain name is therefore confusingly...
2019-04-12 - Case Details
Disputed Domain Name in bad faith under paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. Additionally the Disputed Domain Name appears to be a typosquatting registration...
2017-12-04 - Case Details
Internet-Nutzer bei der Eingabe des Domainnamens durch versehentliche Tippfehler derer auf die eigene Website zu lenken (sogenanntes „Typosquatting...
2017-11-27 - Case Details
as typosquatting. The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. The Respondent has neither prior rights...
2017-10-20 - Case Details
as typosquatting. The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. The Respondent has neither prior rights...
2017-10-06 - Case Details
registration and use of the disputed domain name that differs from the Complainant’s domain name only by the omission of a “.” amounts to typosquatting. The...
2018-02-08 - Case Details
designed to take advantage of any slight misspelling by Internet users of the Complainant’s web address, amounting to so-called “typosquatting”. This...
2018-02-08 - Case Details
registering the disputed domain name, Respondent deliberately engaged in typosquatting, a practice by which a “registrant deliberately introduces slight...
2018-01-25 - Case Details
the disputed domain name and the Complainant's mark indicate that this is an example of "typosquatting" whereby the letter sequence "ure" in the...
2018-01-03 - Case Details
du terme “clients”, est pour sa part banal et le “s”, révèle simplement un acte de “typosquatting”. Ces ajouts et modifications n’altèrent en rien le...
2017-08-25 - Case Details
deletion of a letter in the middle and the addition of one at the end. This indicates a practice commonly known as “typosquatting”, where a domain name...
2017-08-09 - Case Details
"typosquatting", which creates confusing similarity with the Complainant's mark. Accordingly, the Panel finds the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the...
2017-07-14 - Case Details
Domain Name is a misspelt of the Complainant’s trademark ARNOLD CLARK and classic case of typosquatting. The Panel therefore finds that the Domain Name is...
2019-09-27 - Case Details
term “sciences” as well as the top-level domain “.net.” Neither the addition of the top-level domain nor the act of typosquatting through the misspelling...
2021-07-21 - Case Details
a registered trademark has been found by UDRP panels to be a common, and illicit, form of typosquatting that does not make a domain name any less...
2021-07-05 - Case Details
confusingly similar to that mark for purposes of UDRP standing.”). The disputed domain name constitutes typosquatting given that it is nearly identical to the...
2021-07-02 - Case Details
the insertion of a letter “g” and constitutes “typosquatting”. The Complainant submits that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in...
2021-07-01 - Case Details
typosquatting and can cause consumers confusion, fulfilling the requirements of paragraph 4(a)(i). The disputed domain name does not resolve to an active website...
2021-06-30 - Case Details
constitutes “typosquatting”. The Complainant submits that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names. It...
2021-06-30 - Case Details