A gTLD suffix may generally be disregarded in the comparison between a domain name and a trademark for the purposes of the Policy. See Lego Juris A/S v. Chen Yong,
WIPO Case No. D2009-1611; Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG v. zhanglei,
WIPO Case No. ...
2019-05-13 - Case Details
In addition, the fact that the disputed domain name leads to sponsored links is likely to attract customers to the Respondent’s website and resulting in commercial gain for the Respondent (LEGO Juris A/S v. Moustafa Mahmoud,
WIPO Case No. D2012-2047).
Furthermore, by use of a domain name confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark, the Respondent is trading on the value established by the Complainant in its marks to attract Internet users and thereby deriving economic benefit from either those users attracted to the Respondent’s website or by receiving compensation from others if these would-be customers are routed elsewhere. ...
2019-05-24 - Case Details
Prior panels have held that such registration and use of a domain that incorporates a complainant’s trademark to advertise and link to another commercial website to sell a complainant’s goods and/or the goods of a complainant’s competitors constitutes bad faith. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Whois Privacy Protection Service by VALUE- DOMAIN / Kazuhiko Seki,
WIPO Case No. D2016-1080; BISSELL Homecare, Inc. v. ...
2019-05-27 - Case Details
As it has been decided by previous panels, the mere addition of the generic acronym “www” does not eliminate the confusing similarity between a complainant's marks and a domain name (see e.g. LEGO Juris A/S v. Bladimir Boyiko,
WIPO Case No. D2009-0437; The Nasday OMX Group, Inc. v. Eli Shoval,
WIPO Case No. ...
2010-07-15 - Case Details
This is often the case where the domain name resolves to a website consisting of links to products competitive with those of the trademark owner: e.g., Intel Corporation v. The Pentium Group, supra, and Lego Juris A/S v. John Davies,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0160. That is not necessarily a requirement, however. ...
2011-07-15 - Case Details
Back To Bed, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0106 and LEGO Juris A/S v. J.h.Ryu,
WIPO Case No. D2010-1156).
Finally, there is no evidence that Respondent is making any legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the Disputed Domain Name.
...
2010-12-02 - Case Details
It is not necessary that the goods and/or services be identical for passing off to be found. [See, for example, the Lego Lemelstrich case 1983 FSR 155 and others].
6.7 Further, although this is not a case of trade mark infringement either, it is material to have regard to the criteria prescribed by the European Court of Justice in its recent decisions. ...
2000-07-07 - Case Details
Moreover, numerous panels have viewed website suspension by the Registrar or webhost, absent any
explanation or attempted justification by the respondent, as added corroboration of bad faith. See LEGO
Juris A/S v. Ammar Briouel / Brahim Mahjoubi, WIPO Case No. D2019-0750 (involving website suspension
following a takedown request by the complainant); Hershey Entertainment & Resorts Company v. ...
2026-03-12 - Case Details
The Panel thus infers that Respondent must have been aware of this trademark and its reputation when it registered the disputed domain name, so that the disputed domain name () was registered in bad faith”); LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains, LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-05-05 - Case Details
D2021-0774; Compagnie Générale des Etablissements Michelin v. Milen Radumilo,
WIPO Case No. DCO2020-0090; LEGO Juris A/S v. ken Teo,
WIPO Case No. D2020-2380; Sanofi v. WhoisGuard Protected, WhoisGuard, Inc. / Todd Peter,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-07-01 - Case Details
UDRP panels have found that a disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a complainant’s trademark where the disputed domain name incorporates the complainant’s trademark in its entirety (e.g., LEGO Juris A/S v. ken Teo,
WIPO Case No. D2020-2380; Sanofi v. WhoisGuard Protected, WhoisGuard, Inc. / Todd Peter,
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-02-18 - Case Details
Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC / Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion Comercio Electronico,
WIPO Case No. D2019-3045; LEGO Juris A/S v. Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC / Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion Comercio Electronico,
WIPO Case No. ...
2020-03-02 - Case Details
争议域名也包括通用顶级域名后缀“.com”。专家组认为该部分在本案中亦不具有任何区别争议域名与投诉人商标的效果。参见LEGO Juris A/S 诉 Chen Yong，WIPO 案件编号 D2009-1611及Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG 诉 zhanglei，WIPO 案件编号 D2014-0080。
...
2020-09-11 - Case Details
Bad faith may be found where a domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark that said use of the domain name by someone with no connection to the trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains, LLC,
WIPO Case No. ...
2020-09-25 - Case Details
Previous UDRP panels have consistently held that the addition of a descriptive term to a disputed domain name that incorporates a trademark in its entirety typically does not prevent the finding of confusing similarity. See LEGO Juris A/S v. DBA David Inc/ DomainsByProxy.com,
WIPO Case No. D2011-1290.
For all the foregoing reasons, the Panel finds that the first element of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy has therefore been satisfied by the Complainant.
...
2022-01-04 - Case Details
Incorporation of the BELSTAFF mark in the Domain Names without any reasonable justification is sufficient evidence of bad faith by the Respondent under the circumstances. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Caixa D’Estalvis I Pensions de Barcelona (“La Caixa”) v. ...
2012-07-06 - Case Details
The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name because the Respondent has no trademark rights in or license to use the Complainant's trademarks (citing LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2014-12-29 - Case Details
Registered and Used in Bad Faith
Previous UDRP panels have found that where a domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark its very use by someone with no connection to 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. ...
2014-02-21 - Case Details
Previous UDRP panels have found that where a domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark its very use by someone with no connection to 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. ...
2013-12-17 - Case Details
Nall’'s Silks Sari Centre, WIPO Case No. D2009-0664;
LEGO Juris A/S v. Milon Khan, hongbaocomau, WIPO Case No. D2024-5240.
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/
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/text.jsp?...
2026-01-29 - Case Details