The Respondent’s registration of the disputed domain names wholly incorporating the Complainant’s trademark is, in the Panel’s view, indicative of bad faith, since the disputed domain names resolve to websites relating to the same activities as the Complainant’s website.
As mentioned in Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Alexander Ochkin,
WIPO Case No. D2017-0334:
“It is clear in the Panel’s view that in the mind of an Internet user, the disputed domain names could be directly associated with the Complainant’s trademark, which is likely to be confusing to the public as suggesting either an operation of the Complainant or one associated with or endorsed by it (see AT&T Corp. v. ...
2020-04-24 - Case Details
This shows a clear intention of impersonation, trying to make Internet users believe that the website is an official site of the Complainant.
As mentioned in Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Alexander Ochki,
WIPO Case No. D2017-0334:
“It is clear in the Panel’s view that in the mind of an Internet user, the disputed domain names could be directly associated with the Complainant’s trademark, which is likely to be confusing to the public as suggesting either an operation of the Complainant or one associated with or endorsed by it (see AT&T Corp. v. ...
2020-01-22 - Case Details
Past UDRP panels have consistently held that selling competing goods, coupled with the unauthorized use of a complainant's trademark in a confusingly similar domain name, does not qualify as a bona fide offering of goods or services under Policy, paragraph 4(c)(iii) (see Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. R. Vriens, Niro,
WIPO Case No. D2017-0382; Bialetti Industrie S.p.A. v. ...
2017-05-10 - Case Details
The Respondent has been subject to various earlier UDRP disputes where the panel ordered the transfer of the disputed domain names to the complainants (Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Privacy Protection Service, Provided through Communigal Communication Ltd,
WIPO Case No. ...
2018-09-18 - Case Details
Additionally, redirection to pornographic websites is never
considered a fair or bona fide use of a domain name. See, e.g., Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v.
Protection of Private Person / Aleksandr Katkov, WIPO Case No. D2017-0381 (finding the respondent’s use
of the domain name to redirect Internet users to pornographic websites “should and
could not be considered a bona fide offering of goods or services”); see also Bayerische Motoren Werke AG
v. shilin Li¸ WIPO Case No. ...
2022-08-31 - Case Details
Further, it is clear that the use for apparent malware
distribution is in bad faith (see, for example, Euroview Enterprises LLC v. Jinsu Kim, WIPO Case No.
D2016-1124; Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Transfer Service, Sedo.com, LLC., WIPO Case No.
D2018-2510).
The Panel finds that the Complainant has satisfied the third and final element of the Policy.
7. ...
2022-06-08 - Case Details
The use of a trademark in a domain name in which letters have been omitted, added, inverted, or substituted
is commonly known as “typosquatting” and does not negate the confusingly similar aspects of the domain
name pursuant to paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy. Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Registration
Private, Domains by Proxy, LLC / I S, ICS INC, WIPO Case No. ...
2022-11-25 - Case Details
The addition of
the term “logistique”, the hyphen, and the gTLD “.com” does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity with
the Trademarks (see sections 1.8 and 1.11.1 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 and Andrey Ternovskiy dba
Chatroulette v. On behalf of chatroulettede.com OWNER, c/o whoisproxy.com / Domain Admin, High Tech
Investments LTD, WIPO Case No. ...
2023-02-13 - Case Details
The Panel finally notes that Respondent is a systematic cybersquatter who has been found to have registered and used domain names in bad faith in multiple other cases under the Policy, which suggests a pattern of such conduct on the part of Respondent (see, inter alia, Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC / I S, ICS INC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2019-01-16 - Case Details
The WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.3, describes the circumstances under which the passive holding of a domain will be considered to be a bad faith use: “While panelists will look at the totality of the circumstances in each case, factors that have been considered relevant in applying the passive holding doctrine include: (i) the degree of distinctiveness or reputation of the complainant’s mark, (ii) the failure of the respondent to submit a response or to provide any evidence of actual or contemplated good faith use, (iii) the respondent’s concealing its identity or use of false contact details (noted to be in breach of its registration agreement), and (iv) the implausibility of any good faith use to which the domain name may be put”. See Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. WhoisGuard Protected, WhoisGuard, Inc. / Armando Machado,
WIPO Case No. ...
2020-04-21 - Case Details
The Panel further finds that the Domain Name is identical to Complainant’s WESTPAC Mark, incorporating the WESTPAC Mark in its entirety. See Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. DomainAdministrator, See PrivacyGuardian.org / JonasKropf,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-05-31 - Case Details
Domain May Be For Sale, Check afternic.com, Domain Registries Foundation,
WIPO Case No. D2018-1669; Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Whois Foundation, Domain May be For Sale, Check Afternic.com Domain Admin,
WIPO Case No. ...
2020-01-16 - Case Details
The hyphen “-” which is added in the Domain Name does not avoid a finding of confusing similarity as it is non-distinctive (BHP Billiton Innovation Pty Ltd v. Oloyi,
WIPO Case No. D2017-0284; Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. 1&1 Internet Inc / David Grandpierre,
WIPO Case No. D2018-2237; WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), section 1.8).
...
2020-02-28 - Case Details
The word “uk” and the hyphen “-“ which are added in the Domain Name do not avoid a finding of confusing similarity (BHP Billiton Innovation Pty Ltd v. Oloyi,
WIPO Case No. D2017-0284, Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. 1&1 Internet Inc / David Grandpierre,
WIPO Case No. D2018-2237, WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), section 1.8).
...
2019-12-26 - Case Details
Use of a domain name for purposes such as phishing, if the allegations are accepted as true, constitutes bad faith use (WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.4) and further evidences bad faith (Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Transfer Service, Sedo.com, LLC,
WIPO Case No. D2018-2510).
Under these circumstances and on this record, the Panel finds that Respondent has registered and used the Domain Name in bad faith.
...
2021-10-18 - Case Details
According to paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy, registration or use of a domain name will be considered in bad
faith when:
“by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to
your web site or other online location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant’s mark as to
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
page 5
the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on
your web site or location.”
As mentioned in Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Alexander Ochkin, WIPO Case No. D2017-0334:
“It is clear in the Panel’s view that in the mind of an Internet user, the disputed domain names could be
directly associated with the Complainant’s trademark, which is likely to be confusing to the public as
suggesting either an operation of the Complainant or one associated with or endorsed by it (see AT&T Corp.
...
2025-12-22 - Case Details
In fact, the addition of the word “company” to the disputed
domain name shows the Respondent’s intent to impersonate the Complainant.
As mentioned in Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Alexander Ochkin, WIPO Case No. D2017-0334:
“It is clear in the Panel’s view that in the mind of an Internet user, the disputed domain names could be
directly associated with the Complainant’s trademark, which is likely to be confusing to the public as
suggesting either an operation of the Complainant or one associated with or endorsed by it (see AT&T Corp.
...
2023-04-03 - Case Details
The confusingly similarities exist where the trademark is recognizable within the disputed domain names.
See Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC / I S, ICS INC / VMI
INC / Domain Admin, Hush Whois Protection Ltd., WIPO Case No. ...
2022-12-09 - Case Details
The addition of
the geographical term “de”, referring to Germany, and the gTLD “.tech” does not prevent a finding of
confusing similarity with the Trademarks (see sections 1.7 and 1.11.1 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 and Andrey
Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. On behalf of chatroulettede.com OWNER, c/o whoisproxy.com / Domain
Admin, High Tech Investments LTD, WIPO Case No. ...
2022-11-15 - Case Details
The addition of
the term “group” and the gTLD “.com” does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity with the Trademarks
(see sections 1.8 and 1.11.1 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 and Andrey Ternovskiy dba Chatroulette v. On
behalf of chatroulettede.com OWNER, c/o whoisproxy.com / Domain Admin, High Tech Investments LTD,
WIPO Case No. ...
2022-12-23 - Case Details