Pro-Life Domains, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0432; Visa Europe Limited v. DomainByProxy.com / Dahai Huang,
WIPO Case No. D2011-0302). Here, since Respondent has defaulted, it is appropriate to accept the facts asserted by the Complainant and to draw adverse inferences of fact against the Respondent.
...
2011-10-14 - Case Details
The advertising on Complainant’s site covers a wide array of products and services from a range of companies including Apple, Disney, Honda, Microsoft, Sony, Swatch and Visa, to give a few examples.
The public’s use of Complainant’s services is massive. For example, in December 1999, traffic to Complainant’s site averaged 465 million page views per day. ...
2000-11-16 - Case Details
To the Panel's mind it is further obvious that the use which the Respondent made of the disputed domain name to passing off itself as the Complainant, apparently so as to obtaining personal and financial information from Internet users as a result of the intentionally created confusion between the disputed domain name and the Trademarks constitutes use of the disputed domain name in bad faith (e.g. Visa Europe ltd. contre Sophie Dupont,
WIPO Case No. D2014-0119).
Consequently, the third and last element of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy is also met.
7. ...
2015-10-21 - Case Details
Reclamante
A Reclamante alega que:
possui direitos amplamente reconhecidos sobre as marcas BETBOO por meio de diversos registros
de marca no Brasil perante o INPI;
o nome de domínio em disputa incorpora integralmente as marcas registradas BETBOO da
Reclamante;
a inclusão do número “1” é insuficiente para diferenciar o nome de domínio em disputa da marca
registrada da Reclamante;
a inclusão do número “1” no nome de domínio em disputa apenas reforça a ligação com as marcas
registradas da Reclamante, sugerindo que o nome de domínio em disputa está relacionado aos serviços da
Reclamante;
o nome de domínio em disputa é confusamente similar às marcas registradas da Reclamante;
a Reclamada não tem direitos ou interesses legítimos no nome de domínio em disputa;
não há evidências de que a Reclamada possua qualquer autorização, licença ou vínculo legítimo com
a Reclamante;
o nome de domínio em disputa é utilizado de maneira a induzir os consumidores a acreditarem que
há uma associação entre a Reclamada e a Reclamante;
a Reclamada nunca foi comumente conhecido pelo nome de domínio em disputa;
a Reclamada registrou o nome de domínio em disputa, incorporando integralmente a marca da
Reclamante, com a intenção de explorar a reputação da marca registrada da Reclamante;
o uso do nome de domínio em disputa pode configurar “typosquatting”, uma vez que a inclusão de um
único caractere (“1”) visa confundir o consumidor, e;
o nome de domínio em disputa foi registrado de má-fé, sendo evidente que a Reclamada busca
explorar indevidamente os direitos e a reputação da Reclamante.
...
2025-06-27 - Case Details
Comprova possuir registros de sua marca em vários países (Anexo 8 da Reclamação), inclusive no Brasil (Anexo 4 da Reclamação), sendo sua notoriedade reconhecida pela população no tocante ao fornecimento de serviço de mensageria instantânea (Anexo 3 da Reclamação).
Alega que o sítio do Reclamado visa se aproveitar da notoriedade da marca e do serviço da Reclamante, tendo consciência de que estaria infringindo o “contrato de registro sob o domínio .br” e violando direito de terceiro, uma vez que teria violado direitos da Reclamante sobre a marca WHATSAPP no momento do registro do nome de domínio em disputa .
...
2019-12-30 - Case Details
They may also be trying to extract money for processing job applications or costs related to “work permits” or “visa working papers”.
The Panel thus concludes that the registration and use of the disputed domain names constitutes bad faith within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii)of the Policy.
7. ...
2017-04-05 - Case Details
They may also be trying to extract money for processing job applications or costs related to “work permits” or “visa working papers”.
The Panel thus concludes that the registration and use of the Disputed Domain Names constitutes bad faith within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii)of the Policy.
7. ...
2018-05-03 - Case Details
Överväganden och slutsatser
Enligt Policyns paragraf 4(a) måste Sökanden för bifall till sitt yrkande visa (1) att Motpartens domännamn är identiskt eller förväxlingsbart med ett varumärke till vilket Sökanden har rättigheter; och (ii) att Motparten inte har några rättigheter eller legitima intressen i domännamnet; och (iii) att domännamnet har registrerats och är använt i ond tro.
...
2010-06-09 - Case Details
The web address “www.platinummastercard.com” redirects internet users to a portal-style website located at “www.searchportal.information.com” displaying, amongst other things, a link to “Visa Platinum Card”, a product competitive with the Complainant’s services.
The Complainant petitions the Panel for transfer of the domain name.
5. ...
2007-07-12 - Case Details
The mark is used, inter alia, as the brand of a VISA card provided by the
said bank in conjunction with the car company Mercedes-Benz. According to a machine translation of a
press report dated December 30, 2021, Türkiye İş Bankası A.Ş., in cooperation with VISA, provides its
customers with a higher rate of miles via the “Maximiles Black” card. ...
2023-05-25 - Case Details
Factual Background
Complainant provides a signed Declaration from its CEO stating that it is “a payment processing company and is a member of the Electronic Transactions Alliance and the Direct Response Marketing Alliance”; that it is “authorized to process payments from the world’s largest credit card brands, including but not limited to Visa, Discover, MasterCard, and American Express”; that it operates a website using the domain name ; and that it “has become well-known in the payment processing industry and has spent more than [USD] 1,310,000 marketing its goods and services”.
...Complainant is a payment processor whose customers are sophisticated credit card companies: e.g., Visa, Mastercard, and the like. Respondent is a conduit for cryptocurrency transactions (e.g., Bitcoin) through blockchain technology and a proprietary app directed to the general public.
...
2018-09-28 - Case Details
It has offered general credit card lending and servicing activities since 1996 and provides unsecured general-purpose credit cards, including the ASPIRE visa credit card.
The Complainant is the registered owner of the domain name and the trademarks ASPIRE, FOR EVERYTHING YOU ASPIRE TO BE, ASPIRE ROAD MILES, ASPIRE A MAS, ASPIRE AHORA in the United States of America (the “Aspire” marks).
...The Complainant provides a screen shot of the Disputed Domain Name on January 19, 2007, in which a notice is displayed stating that the “ASPIRE VISA” had discontinued. The Complainant believes that this message was shown in an effort to deceive Internet users into obtaining a competing credit card. ...
2007-06-28 - Case Details
Given Respondent’s failure to explain the nature of its website at the disputed domain name, on April 9, 2013 the Panel connected its browser to the website at the disputed domain name, which showed contents exclusively related to offering Visa and MasterCard credit cards, including solicitations to submit online applications for such cards through certain links, also provided on the website. ...
2013-05-10 - Case Details
Domännamnet är identiskt med eller liknar en rättighet vilken har rättsgrund i Sverige och till
vilken den som begärt tvistlösningen kan visa rätt
Sökanden har inkommit med utdrag från varumärkesregister (TMview) som visar att Sökanden innehar ett
flertal varumärkesregistreringar som innefattar elementet “max”. ...
2023-01-17 - Case Details
The Complainant
markets credit cards, under the name Saison Card, that are branded Visa, Mastercard, JCB, or American
Express.
The Complainant is the owner of multiple trademark registrations SAISON CARD containing the word
elements in Japan, including:
- Japanese Trademark for a logo with the only word elements SAISON CARD, registered on August 8,
1997, with registration number 3337687;
- Japanese Trademark for a logo with the only word elements SAISON CARD, registered on November
21, 2008, with registration number 3337687/01.
...
2024-02-29 - Case Details
The disputed domain name is used for a redirection to a website at the domain name
. On that website, the Respondent offers Visa and immigration services,
apparently for people in Vietnam/Asia who are interested in immigrating to Canada and other Western
countries.
...
2022-04-20 - Case Details
The Domain Name resolves to a website with “Related Links” to: Mastercard Credit Card, Visa Credit Card, Banking Account, Bank Card, Credit Card, and Banking. After clicking on Mastercard Credit Card, for example, the public is taken to a page of various marketing ads and associated links to apply for credit cards (e.g., Discover Card, Mastercard). ...
2021-05-31 - Case Details
According to the WhoIs records, the disputed domain name was registered on August 15, 2021 and it resolves to a website consisting of a directory of pay-per-click links and showing the Complainant’s trademark MASTERCARD as well as the trademark of a Complainant’s competitor, namely VISA.
5. Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
The Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark CASH PASSPORT, as the disputed domain name wholly contains the Complainant’s trademark with the addition of the descriptive term “my”.
...
2021-11-24 - Case Details
In his informal Response, the Respondent stated:
“Hi,
Thank you for your interesting , and please suspend dispute because we are bein agent in kuwait, and all our works are legal And no one customer has ever complained about us, and work hard to satisfy every customer And if you have and complaint from any customer or platform like (Paypal - Master - Visa - Enet), please show us, because we fulfill all orders in same hour (less than 15 minute) Again, all our works are legal, so please suspend dispute.
...
2021-07-20 - Case Details
The Complainant is backed by investors such as Seqouia Capital, Bestseller, Permira, Visa and Atomico.
The Complainant is the owner of the several trademark registrations worldwide, including Switzerland and China:
- KLARNA (Trademark No. 14203832) registered on May 7, 2015 in China;
- KLARNA (Trademark No. 14203834) registered on May 21, 2015 in China;
- (Trademark No. 14203836) registered on June 7, 2015 in China; and
- (Trademark No. 14203837) registered on August 7, 2015 in China.
...
2019-08-15 - Case Details