The Complainant submits that it has never authorised the Respondent to use its mark and that this is a
classic case of typosquatting which is an indication of the Respondent’s lack of rights or legitimate interests
in the disputed domain name. ...In addition, it says that this is an example of typosquatting
which in and of itself amounts to evidence of bad faith.
B. Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. ...
2026-01-14 - Case Details
The Panel concurs with this assertion and concludes that Respondent has indeed engaged in typosquatting with the intent of catching Internet users that might accidently leave off the "m" when typing “www.delta.com”. ...Zuccarini,
WIPO Case No. D2002-1011 (concluding that typosquatting is inherently parasitic and evidence of bad faith registration and use of a domain name); see also Zone Labs, Inc. v. ...
2013-01-03 - Case Details
It is well established that where there is “typosquatting”, the domain name in question can be considered to
be confusing similarly to the trademark (Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft v. ...case=D2022-1438
page 4
The Panel considers this to be a clear case of typosquatting. The disputed domain name is confusingly
similar to the Complainant’s bet365 trademark.
...
2023-02-01 - Case Details
Steven Newman a/k/a Jill Wasserstein a/k/a Pluto Newman, WIPO Case No. D2006-0517: “the practice of
typosquatting, in and of itself, constitutes bad faith registration”. See also Go Daddy Software, Inc. v. Daniel Hadani, WIPO Case No.
D2002-0568: “Typosquatting is virtually per se registration and use in bad faith”.
2 See Bartercard Ltd & Bartercard International Pty Ltd . v Ashton-Hall Computer Services, WIPO Case No. ...
2024-01-02 - Case Details
The Panel considers this to be a clear case of typosquatting particularly because the Respondent’s website uses the term “smoothskin” without the number “5”.
...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. ...
2021-05-14 - Case Details
Shep Dog,
WIPO Case No. D2004-1069 (finding typosquatting to be evidence of bad faith domain name registration). See also Lexar Media, Inc. v. Huang,
WIPO Case No. D2004-1039 (“Typosquatting has been held under the Policy to be evidence of bad faith registration of a domain name”). See also Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2022-03-17 - Case Details
Complainant thus asserts that Respondent is engaging in “typosquatting”. Complainant also
notes that the disputed domain name leads to a parking page displaying sponsored links, and contains a
conf igured email server thereby “increasing the risk of phishing activities”. ...The disputed domain name is being used for “typosquatting”, in order to lead Internet users to a page with
sponsored links. Registration of a domain name for typosquatting and a pay-per-click website is not bona
fide and does not give rise to rights or legitimate interests. ...
2024-02-22 - Case Details
The Panel is also not persuaded that Respondent has engaged in typosquatting. A word is not a “typo”
merely because it differs by one letter in the same position from another word.2 When a letter is changed in
the typical typosquatting case, the result is a mangled misspelled word; the resulting word has no known
meaning. ...Cayman Trademark Trust, WIPO Case No. D2006-0073
( reflects typosquatting); Sanofi v. Domains By Proxy, LLC / domain admin, WIPO Case
No. D2013-0368 ( reflects typosquatting)
In contrast, where the difference is an intentional change to spell a different valid word, the registrant is not
intending to exploit a mistake. ...
2024-10-18 - Case Details
The practice of typosquatting, a type of cybersquatting, is itself considered indicative of bad faith registration and use of a domain name (see Redbox Automated Retail, LLC d/b/a Redbox v. ...D2019-1600, “[t]yposquatting itself is evidence of relevant bad faith registration and use”).
The practice of typosquatting related to the Complainant’s TOMMY BAHAMA mark has been addressed by previous UDRP panels as indicative of bad faith registration of a domain name (see Tommy Bahama Group, Inc. v. ...
2020-04-17 - Case Details
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. ...
2021-04-20 - Case Details
Indeed, in this Complaint, Respondent’s singularizing of the ordinarily double consonant “l” letters, and substitution of the keyboard adjacent “n” and “m” letters, constitutes obvious and intentional typosquatting.
In view of Complainant’s registration for the HALLIBURTON trademark, and Respondent’s clear attempt at typosquatting on the HALLIBURTON 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. ...
2020-03-26 - Case Details
Data Art Corp. et al., WIPO
Case No. D2000-0587, “‘typosquatting,’ is a practice that
has been condemned and been found to be confusingly similar to the marks which
they mimic.”
...Respondent is not making a legitimate noncommercial use of the disputed domain name. Respondent has engaged in a typosquatting practice to divert, for commercial gain, consumers looking for Complainant’s products on the Internet. ...
2005-02-09 - Case Details
This not bona fide. The Respondent is engaged in “typosquatting”.
Finally, the Complainant submits that the Complainant is well known throughout the world, and the
Respondent must have been aware of the Complainant’s trademark when the Respondent registered the
Domain Name. Furthermore, the Complainant’s MICHELIN trademark registrations predate the registration
date of the Domain Name. The Domain Name constitutes a typosquatting variant of the Complainant’s
trademark, and typosquatting is sufficient to establish use and registration in bad faith. ...
2022-08-18 - Case Details
Complainant bears the burden of proof to demonstrate each of the required elements of paragraph 4 of the Policy.
This is a classic case of typosquatting, as the disputed domain name is a slight misspelling of Complainant’s trademark. Here, other than adding the gTLD “.com” the only difference between Complainant’s mark and the disputed domain name is Respondent’s replacing the final “o” with an “e.”4
Typosquatting is as close as one can come to per se cybersquatting, as selecting a domain name incorporating a slight misspelling reveals knowledge of Complainant and its mark and a tacit acknowledgment that the mark has value. ...Complainant has shown with competent evidence that it holds registered trademarks for QUINCY and QUINCY COMPRESSOR, and in this Panel’s view, by typosquatting Respondent has perforce acknowledged confusing similarity (in any case the Panel so finds such confusing similarity here). ...
2010-12-17 - Case Details
Registered and Used in Bad Faith
The Complainant contends that the Disputed Domain Name was registered, and is being used in bad faith on the basis that:
i) the Disputed Domain Name consists of the well-known marks of the Complainant;
ii) the Disputed Domain Name is being used to generate revenue for the Respondent by riding off the goodwill in the Complainant’s trade marks;
iii) the registration of a typosquatting domain name is itself evidence of bad faith; and
iv) the Respondent has a history of typosquatting.
...In addition, such an inference is supported by the fact that the Respondent has a history of typosquatting.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complainant has shown that the Respondent registered and has used the Disputed Domain Name in bad faith. ...
2011-02-07 - Case Details
According to the Complainant, the Respondent is engaged in “typosquatting”, a practice which consists of a registration which is only a slight variation of a legitimate mark. The Complainant makes the very same arguments for the other two Disputed Domain Names which contain a mistaken letter which constitutes this same “typosquatting” and the Complainant sites a number of cases of UDRP jurisprudence where panels have found that such “typosquatting” is held to be confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark or sites and thus constitutes the first finding for the particular panel in seeking a decision in that matter.
...
2010-07-27 - Case Details
Additionally, panels have consistently found that a domain name consisting of a misspelling of
the complainant’s trademark (i.e. typosquatting) is considered confusingly similar to the complainant’s mark.
WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.9. ...Complainant
The Complainant contends that Respondent’s registration of the disputed domain name is considered as typosquatting, and therefore is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s CORNING trademarks. The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name i...
...
2024-02-27 - Case Details
The
disputed domain name is obviously intended to be a typosquatting registration differing by one letter “s” from
the Complainant’s domain name .
...Typosquatting is commonly held to be bad faith per se showing knowledge of a complainant’s mark. WIPO
Overview 3.0, section 3.2.1
The Respondent appears to have registered another domain name not the subject of these proceedings
containing a misspelling of the Complainant’s trademark intended to be a typosquatting registration, pointing
to a holding page and registered on the same day as the disputed domain name as “Accounts receivable”
with similar false contact and MX server details demonstrating that the Respondent is engaging in a pattern
of bad faith activity.
...
2024-12-27 - Case Details
To the contrary, the evidence shows typosquatting, an attempted impersonation, and an intended deceptive
use for commercial gain. WIPO Overview 3.0, sections 2.5 and 2.13. ...The
Respondent has not explained the selection of this unusual Domain Name. Typosquatting, coupled with an
absence of rights or legitimate interests, tends to show bad faith. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.2.1.
...
2024-08-06 - Case Details
The Complainant submits that this is a clear example of “typosquatting” whereby a registrant deliberately introduces slight deviations into famous marks for commercial gain. ...The Panel agrees with this submission to the effect that “the practice of typosquatting, in and of itself, constitutes bad faith registration” as decided by the panel in Amazon.com. ...
2020-11-03 - Case Details