About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

Full Text Search on WIPO Panel Decisions

Found 58350   document(s)s (0.129 sec)

Rows

<<  <  57501 - 57520  >  >>

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2009-0447 for shadygrovefertilitycenter.com, shadygrovefertilty.com html (10 KB)

The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”). ...D2005-1132 to support the position that a panel may authorize the voluntary transfer of a disputed domain name, without the necessity of reviewing the facts and arguments, or making any finding on the merits of the matter under the Policy. ...

2009-05-29 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2023-2535 for onlybestfans.cyou, onlybestfans.fun pdf (239 KB)

The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”). ...As such, where a complainant makes out a prima facie case that the respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests, the burden of production on this element shifts to the respondent to come forward with relevant evidence demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. ...

2023-09-05 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2017-1989 for isodiolcbd.net, isodiolcbd.org, isodioldirect.com html (27 KB)

The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”). ...Rob Robinson, CBD Industry Domain name owner”. The content of the emails was a negotiation for the purchase of the Disputed Domain Names, as discussed above. ...

2017-12-07 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2000-0664 for priceclub.com, priceclub.net, priceclub2000.com html (8 KB)

Respondent has not contested the complainant’s allegations.   6. Discussion and Findings Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy directs that the complainant must prove each of the following: (1) that the domain name registered by the respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and, (2) that the respondent has no legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and, (3) the domain name has been registered and used in bad faith. ...Respondent also has not denied complainant’s allegation of bad faith registration and use. In the Commencement Notification, respondent was informed that Paragraph 14 of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy provides that the Panel "may draw such inferences from your default as it considers appropriate." ...

2000-09-09 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2023-2390 for 1fr-cic.com, www-cic.com pdf (148 KB)

Then, the Panel notices that the Disputed Domain Names are composed of the identical reproduction of the well-known CIC Trademarks in its entirety, to which has been added the terms: (i) “1fr” separated by a hyphen for the first Disputed Domain Name; (ii) “www” separated by a hyphen for the second Disputed Domain Name; and (iii) the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.com”. ...Furthermore, the gTLD “.com” is viewed as a standard registration requirement and as such is disregarded for the purpose of determining whether a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark. ...

2023-08-03 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-1151 for calvinkleinjeans.shop, calvinkleinjeans.store, calvinkleinperformance.shop, calvinkleinperformance.store, calvinkleinunderwear.shop, calvinkleinunderwear.store html (14 KB)

The Respondent did not comment on the language of the proceeding. The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”). ...The Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain names in bad faith. As at the time of filing the Complaint and amended Complaint, the disputed domain names resolved to inactive webpages. ...

2021-06-14 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-2690 for michelin.cash, michelin.finance, michelin.money pdf (149 KB)

The Respondent is neither affiliated with the Complainant in any way nor has been authorized by the Complainant to use and register the Complainant’s MICHELIN Trademarks, or to seek registration of any domain name incorporating the MICHELIN Trademarks. Furthermore, the Respondent cannot claim prior rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names as the MICHELIN Trademarks precede the registration of the disputed domain names for years. ...The Respondent used the websites to which the disputed domain names resolved, for offering for sale the disputed domain names and at the price of USD 3,000, and the disputed domain name at the price of USD 5,000. ...

2022-10-11 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2019-0648 for dinerscash.com, dinerscash.info, dinerscash.net, dinerscash.org html (14 KB)

The Respondent objects to the registration of trademarks that comprise common words and to the implications of this for the domain name system. ...In this regard, the Panel finds that the Respondent has used the disputed domain name to create a likelihood of confusion between that disputed domain name and the Complainant’s trademark in the manner contemplated by paragraph 4(b)(iv) of the Policy. ...

2019-06-11 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2016-2210 for petplanplus.com html (11 KB)

The Respondent is Tulip Trading Company of Charlestown, Saint Kitts and Nevis. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Key-Systems GmbH dba domaindiscount24.com (the “Registrar”). 3. ...The Respondent registered the disputed domain name on March 18, 2016. The disputed domain name resolves to a website containing pay-per-click (“PPC”) links to third-party websites, some of which offer competing products to those of the Complainant. 5. ...

2017-02-06 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-1018 for marlboroqiuz.com, marlboroqiz.com, marlboroqui.com, marlboroquizz.com, marlboroquz.com, wwwmarlboroquiz.com html (14 KB)

The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”). ...It is well established that a domain name that wholly incorporates a trademark generally may be confusingly similar to such trademark for purposes of the Policy despite the addition of other terms (Guccio Gucci S.p.A. v. ...

2020-06-29 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2013-1290 for westinhotels-kl.com html (11 KB)

The Respondent has not presented evidence that the Respondent used or made preparations to use the Domain Name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services, that the Respondent is commonly known by the Domain Name or that the Respondent is making a noncommercial or fair use of the Domain Name, or in any other way refuted the Complainant’s prima facie case. ...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complainant has established this element of the Policy. C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith Paragraph 4(b) of the Policy states that the following circumstances are evidence of registration and use of a domain name in bad faith: (i) circumstances indicating that the respondent has registered or acquired the domain name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting, or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the complainant who is the owner of the trademark or service mark or to a competitor of that complainant, for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name; or (ii) the respondent registered the domain name in order to prevent the owner of the trademark or service mark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided that the respondent has engaged in a pattern of such conduct; or (iii) the respondent has registered the domain name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or (iv) by using the domain name, the respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its web site or other online location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant’s mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of its web site or location or of a product or service on its web site or location. ...

2013-09-26 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision DNL2012-0070 for lego24.nl html (5 KB)

The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name (the “Domain name”) is registered with SIDN through Virtual Registrar. 3. ...In this case the parties were apparently not able to formalize the settlement and/or transfer of the Domain Name during the suspension of the proceedings. The Panel notes, however, that the Respondent has unequivocally indicated that it no longer wishes to keep the Domain Name registered in its name (the Panel has ascertained that the Domain Name registration has remained in the Respondent’s name throughout these proceedings). ...

2013-03-04 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2017-0393 for arla-organic-milk.com, arla-organic-milk.net, arla-organic-milk.org, arla-organic.com, arla-organic.net, arla-organic.org, arlaorganic.com, arlaorganic.net, arlaorganic.org html (12 KB)

The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy" or "UDRP"), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules"), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Supplemental Rules"). ...However, Respondent sent numerous emails to the Center indicating its alleged willingness to transfer the disputed domain names to Complainant. 6. Discussion and Findings Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy provides that in order to divest a respondent of a domain name, a complainant must demonstrate each of the following: (i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which complainant has rights; and (ii) respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and (iii) the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. ...

2017-05-10 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-4990 for qbdataservicesupport.com pdf (42 KB)

In some instances, however, panels have taken note of the content of the website associated with a domain name to confirm confusing similarity whereby it appears prima facie that the respondent seeks to target a trademark through the disputed domain name. ...Bad faith in the circumstances of this case is also confirmed from the Respondent’s use of a privacy service to register the disputed domain name. ...

2023-03-16 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2025-2914 for co-lactalis.com pdf (146 KB)

It has no consent from the Complainant to register any domain name incorporating the Complainant’s trademark, it has not used the disputed domain names for a bona fide offering of goods or services, and the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, nor is it making noncommercial fair use of the disputed domain name. ...Given the reputation or the distinctiveness of the Complainant’s mark, the composition of the disputed domain name, the Respondent’s lack of participation in this proceeding, the lack of any credible good faith use to which the confusingly similar disputed domain name could be put, and the Respondent’s use of privacy service, the totality of circumstances surrounding the non-use of the disputed domain name does not prevent a finding of bad faith. ...

2025-09-24 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2002-0485 for lastminute-air-france.com, lastminute-air-france.net html (12 KB)

Through its trademark attorney, Complainant sent a formal letter on October 24, 2001 asking Respondent to cease and desist from any unauthorized use of the domain names at issue and of the domain name , a domain name which was then registered in the name of Respondent but no longer is; Complainant also requested Respondent to cancel the said domain names. ...The same will be said in relation with the dash between Air and France in the domain name at issue. Finally, it is of no relevance that the domain names at issue do not use capital letters for Air and for France, as Internet users are used to the complete disregard of the ordinary rules for capitalization. ...

2002-08-02 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2000-1164 for connexionbyboeing.com, connexionbyboeing.net html (16 KB)

The domain name "connexionbyboeing.com" fully incorporates complainant’s valuable and famous trademark and trade name boeing and is confusingly similar to that mark and name. ...Respondent The Respondent has not participated in this proceeding and no material authored by it has been made available to the Administrative Panel.   8. Discussion and Findings Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires the Complainant to prove that: a) the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a service mark to which the Complainant has rights; b) the Respondent has no legitimate interest in respect of the domain name; c) the domain name has been registered or is being used in bad faith. ...

2000-10-26 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2013-0279 for allianz-insurances.com html (8 KB)

Such use of a descriptive or generic word in connection with a well-known trademark is bound to enhance the association of the disputed domain name with the well-known trademark. ...Omar Guerrero / 1&1 Internet, Inc., WIPO Case No. D2012-2307, to be evidence of bad faith registration and use of the disputed domain name in that case, . The Panel notes the Complainant's contention that the disputed domain name resolves to the Complainant's legitimate website, thereby enhancing the association between the Complainant and the disputed domain name. ...

2013-04-05 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2016-2380 for abouttimetobuyfacebooklikes.top, bbuyinstagramfollowers.top, best-place-to-buy-facebook-likes.top, best-site-to-buy-targeted-facebook-likes.top, buy-10000-facebook-fans.top, buy-10000-likes-on-facebook.top, buy-facebook-likes-on-a-picture.top, buy-facebook-likes-on-a-post.top ... html (31 KB)

It is also well established that any gTLD, including, as is the case here, the gTLD “.top”, does not generally affect the assessment of a domain name for the purpose of determining identity or confusingly similarity. ...Thus, the consensus view of UDRP panels is that paragraph 4(c) of the Policy shifts the burden of production of evidence to the respondent to come forward with evidence of rights or legitimate interests in a domain name, once the complainant has made a prima facie showing, as the Panel believes the Complainants have made in this case. ...

2017-01-26 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2010-2034 for sahibınden.com, sahıbinden.com html (19 KB)

The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”). ...The argument by the Respondent stating that the design of the web sites linked to the disputed domain names compared to the design of the Complainant’s marketplace operated under the domain name are different, is not convincing. ...

2011-01-20 - Case Details