The Complainant is not affiliated with nor has it licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trade mark (see LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-09-08 - Case Details
Although there is no evidence the Respondent has profited from its activities, this Panel finds that it is sufficient for a finding of bad faith use that the Respondent intended that it be the only beneficiary of the diverted Internet traffic (see: LEGO Juris A/S v. Project Xenos, Ty Weir,
WIPO Case No. D2011-1281 (“commercial gain need not accrue to Respondent – only that Respondent had the intention, for commercial gain”); Grupo Costamex, SA de C.V. v. ...
2021-03-29 - Case Details
See, section 3.1.4 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 and cases cited therein; The Gap, Inc. v. Deng Youqian,
WIPO Case No. D2009-0113; LEGO Juris A/S v. store24hour,
WIPO Case No. D2013-0091.
Moreover, the various and ever-changing contents of the website under the disputed domain name suggests that the Respondent is not seeking ways to run a legitimate business but rather is seeking to leverage the Complainant’s well-known MICHELIN Mark for its own financial gain and/or nefarious fraudulent purposes. ...
2021-02-22 - Case Details
In the Panel’s view, such conduct cannot be regarded as giving rise to rights or legitimate interests on the part of the Respondent to register and use the disputed domain name (see, e.g., LEGO Juris A/S v. Andrei Novakovich,
WIPO Case No. D2016-1513).
According to section 2.9 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 the use of a domain name to host a parked page comprising pay-per-click links does not represent a bona fide offering where such links compete with or capitalize on the reputation and goodwill of the complainant’s mark or otherwise mislead Internet users. ...
2021-02-12 - Case Details
The Complainant has provided evidence that it owns trademark registrations long before the disputed domain name was registered and that it is not affiliated with nor has it licensed or otherwise permitted the Respondent to use the Complainant’s trademark (see LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-02-03 - Case Details
The Complainant relies upon established authority (see, for example, LEGO Juris A/S v Reiner Stotte, WIPO
Case No. D2010-0494) that bad faith can be found where the domain name is so obviously connected to a
well-known trade mark that its use (or registration) by someone with no connection to the trade mark
constitutes opportunistic bad faith. ...
2022-09-07 - Case Details
Previous UDRP panels have found that the incorporation of an ISO code is not sufficient to avoid a finding of confusing similarity (see LEGO Juris A/S c. pcmaniabg, Paisiy Aleksandrov,
WIPO Case No. D2010-1965).
According to section 1.11.1 of the WIPO Overview 3.0, the applicable Top Level Domain (“TLD”) in a domain name is viewed as a standard registration requirement and as such should be disregarded under the first element confusingly similar test.
...
2022-01-13 - Case Details
As decided in other UDRP cases, “the test of identity or confusing similarity under the Policy is confined to a comparison of the disputed domain name and the trademark alone”. LEGO Juris A/S v. Name Administrator, Hong Kong Domains, LLC., supra. See also Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2015-01-08 - Case Details
As decided in other UDRP cases, “the test of identity or confusing similarity under the Policy is confined to a comparison of the disputed domain name and the trademark alone”. LEGO Juris A/S v. Name Administrator, Hong Kong Domains, LLC.,
WIPO Case No. D2009-0924. See also Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2014-08-27 - Case Details
Prior UDRP panels have held that registering and using domain names which correspond to well-known trademarks may in appropriate circumstances suggest bad faith (Carrefour v. Simon Lundgren,
WIPO Case No. DAE2014-0001; LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Sanofi-aventis v. Nevis Domains LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2014-09-03 - Case Details
As decided in other WIPO UDRP cases, “the test of identity or confusing similarity under the Policy is confined to a comparison of the disputed domain name and the trademark alone”. LEGO Juris A/S v. Name Administrator, Hong Kong Domains, LLC., supra. See also Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2013-10-07 - Case Details
Additionally, the following also support a finding of bad faith:
- failure to respond to the cease and desist email (see e.g. LEGO Juris A/S v. store24hour,
WIPO Case No. D2013-0091 and cases cited therein); and
- the listing of the registrant as “No Owner” and provision of an address in Iran that could not be verified. ...
2013-09-26 - Case Details
As the Complainant rightly points out, UDRP panels found in previous decisions that in the absence of any license or permission from the Complainant to use such widely-known trademarks, no actual or contemplated bona fide or legitimate use of a disputed domain name could reasonably be claimed (Lego Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2013-01-31 - Case Details
As decided in other UDRP cases, “the test of identity or confusing similarity under the Policy is confined to a comparison of the disputed domain name and the trademark alone”. LEGO Juris A/S v. Name Administrator, Hong Kong Domains, LLC.,
WIPO Case No. D2009-0924. See also Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2012-12-21 - Case Details
As decided in other UDRP cases, “the test of identity or confusing similarity under the Policy is confined to a comparison of the disputed domain name and the trademark alone”. LEGO Juris A/S v. Name Administrator, Hong Kong Domains, LLC.,
WIPO Case No. D2009-0924. See also Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2015-03-25 - Case Details
Finally, the Complainant claims that the Respondent Ni How, solely and jointly with Above.com Domain Privacy, was a respondent in a number of other UDRP cases, e.g. Lego Juris A/S v. Ni How,
WIPO Case No. D2012-2218; Inter IKEA Systems B.V. v.Above.com Domain Privacy / Ni How,
WIPO Case No.D2013-0387.
...
2013-06-21 - Case Details
See, kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba dba Toshiba Corporation v WUFACAI,
WIPO Case No. D2006-0768; LEGO Juris A/S v Budi Irshandi/Cha Licious,
WIPO Case No. D2012-2343 (for “uk”); Fashions Limited v Australia Karen Millen, Linde Meredith,
WIPO Case No. ...
2013-06-20 - Case Details
Several UDRP panels have held that registering and using domain names which correspond to well-known trademarks suggests bad faith (LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494 and Sanofi-aventis v. Nevis Domains LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2014-10-23 - Case Details
Bad faith is found where a domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark that its very use by someone with no connection with the trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith (LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Sanofi-aventis v. Nevis Domains LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2013-10-18 - Case Details
As the Complainant rightly points out, UDRP panels found in previous decisions that in the absence of any license or permission from the Complainant to use such widely-known trademarks, no actual or contemplated bona fide or legitimate use of a disputed domain name may reasonably be claimed (Lego Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2013-11-15 - Case Details