The historical captures of the Respondent’s website on The Wayback Machine at <archive.org> (which the Respondent invited the Panel to examine, and which the Panel is within bounds to do (see WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.8)) are consistent with the Respondent’s assertions that it is a reseller of authentic items.
...
2021-11-12 - Case Details
Again, contrary to the Complainant's assertion the Disputed Domain Name has not been the subject of passive holding. Archive.org shows that at least since July 17, 2008 the Disputed Domain Name has directed to a site displaying the Respondent's name, trade mark and telephone number in the manner described in paragraph 5 above. ...
2014-06-02 - Case Details
An archived copy of the website from March 11, 2007 from <archive.org> also shows similar content.
Complainant further states that after becoming aware of the registration of the disputed domain name in December 2009, it advised Respondent by email dated January 18, 2010 that Respondent's unauthorized use of the ROLLS-ROYCE trademark in connection with the disputed domain name violated Complainant's trademark rights. ...
2010-05-14 - Case Details
Therefore, the Panel has carried out limited factual research (see WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on
Selected UDRP Questions,
Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”) section 4.8) with the following results:
1) it appears that the Complainant may have discontinued use of the AHNU brand in 2018 - see
https://footwearnews.com/business/business-news/deckers-launches-ahnu-sneaker-brand-release-info-
1203598526.
2) searches on archive.org would appear to indicate that in 2020 and up to April 16, 2021 (the date of the last
available snapshot prior to the Respondent’s registration of the domain name at issue), the domain name
continued to be used, but by means of redirecting to a website promoting footwear brands of
the Complainant other than the AHNU brand.
...
2024-06-25 - Case Details
This is evident not only from the existing active website at the disputed domain name but also on archive.org showing use since December 1998. The website clearly shows that the Respondent has been a supplier of high quality customized leather products and the word “PUMA” or “PUMA Exports” is nowhere used upon any products supplied.
...
2021-08-10 - Case Details
On April 14, 2017, the Respondent registered the domain name .
A 2019 Archive.org screenshot shows use of the domain name by the Complainant for a website branded “Kinetik Adrenalink” offering branded clothing for sale that included the word “Kinetik” and the K Arrow Logo.
...
2021-06-01 - Case Details
According to auDA, the disputed domain name was first registered in the Respondent’s name on September
27, 2020.
According to Wayback Machine records at <archive.org>, during 2018 the disputed domain name resolved
to a website at which baby and mothercare products were offered for sale under the name “Metro Baby”.
...
2022-07-28 - Case Details
The Complainant says that the Respondent does not own any registered trademark for “diler”, and that the Complainant has never provided the Respondent with any permission or license regarding the use of its trademarks. By reference to evidence from “archive.org” of the Respondent’s website, the Complainant says that there has never been any active use of the Respondent’s website: that it has not published any kind of service and that the page has remained blank.
...
2014-03-11 - Case Details
This proposition is based on the fact that the Respondent made no use of the Domain Name for a period of almost four years, up to some date after May 21, 2013 (the last snapshot of the Respondent’s web page under the Domain Name from the Wayback Machine (<archive.org>) produced by the Complainant that shows the Domain Name as “parked”. From this, and from the fact that the Respondent has registered many domain names that comprise the well-known brand names of other companies, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent’s website is just a ruse, created in light of the Complainant’s obvious interest in the Domain Name, in order to push up the price he could demand. ...
2015-04-10 - Case Details
A news item dated November
13, 2023 published on the site announces that the English trademark of Thule brand PPR pipes and pipe
fittings authorized by the Complainant has been changed to “TORO 25 THERM”.
2 The Panel again notes its general powers articulated inter alia in paragraphs 10 and 12 of the Rules and has searched the publicly
available Internet archive (<archive.org>) in order to verify the use to which the disputed domain name was put prior to this dispute. ...
2024-03-19 - Case Details
d) La marca tiene una importante presencia en las tiendas físicas en Internet, incluyendo redes sociales y ha
sido utilizada ininterrumpidamente:
d.1 Por lo menos desde el mes de diciembre del 2002, tal y como se puede evidenciar del sitio de Internet
WAYBACK MACHINE visible en Wayback Machine (archive.org), en el que se registran por lo menos 205
visitas al sitio (disponibles para verificación) desde esa fecha.
...
2024-11-28 - Case Details
See e.g., auDRP Overview, section 2.1A.
Searches of the Wayback Machine at <archive.org> do disclose that the Respondent has been operating a website at “www.101webtech.com.au” since at least November 2004.
...
2021-04-08 - Case Details
b) a search of the ‘wayback machine’ (http://archive.org/web/) provides historical ‘snapshots’ which appear to show a commercial website located at ‘www.musicmaker.com’ offering a service enabling customers to choose music tracks by commercial artists and ‘assemble’ their own custom cd, such website appearing to have been active from at least 1998 to 2000.
4. ...
2015-10-09 - Case Details
According to the documents and statements submitted by the Complainants, the disputed domain name is currently pointed to the Complainants’ web site and historical screenshots for the disputed domain name are not available on the “Archive.org” way-back machine due to the Respondent’s use of robots.txt. However, the Panel verified that historical screenshots for the disputed domain name are publicly available on “www.screenshots.com”. 1 A review of these screenshots shows that the disputed domain name was pointed, on May 3, 2005, to a web page where the disputed domain name was offered for sale and, on June 20, 2007, to a web site promoting the sale of CAFÉ DEL MAR music compilations, including the first editions released on 1995 and 1996. ...
2016-10-03 - Case Details
The Respondent also relies upon historical records obtained from "archive.org" which it says show that the Disputed Domain Name has never been linked to an active website but has in the past been offered for sale. ...
2018-09-11 - Case Details
Contrary to the suggestion in the Complaint, the Respondent has not used the Domain Name to display ads for software or other goods and services competitive with the Complainant's. A review of the archive.org print-outs annexed to the Complaint, as well as additional web page screenshots from DomainTools.com, supports Respondent's position that it has not used the Domain Name in connection with software but, rather, with respect to auto parts, related automobile products, and generic goods and services.
...
2009-07-23 - Case Details
The Respondent, Rico Dekker, is a private individual
who appears (from inspection of historical records at Archive.org) to have acquired
control over the Domain Name at some time after January 11, 2006, when the Complainant
reportedly omitted to renew its registration.
5. ...
2007-04-18 - Case Details
Astfel, Reclamantul ar fi putut, dacă dorea, să înregistreze și numele de domeniu tot în august 1999;
- în perioada 2 decembrie 1999 -1 iunie 2019 numele de domeniu a fost deținut de către un terț persoană juridică și, din cercetările Pârâtului pe “archive.org”, website-ul aferent acestuia a fost utilizat pentru reclame și asocieri cu alte website-uri neavând legătură cu Reclamantul și nu au creat confuzie cu marca Reclamantului timp de 20 de ani. ...
2020-11-17 - Case Details
Given the Parties’ respective claims and the lack of a dispute that Complainant had a website prior to when Respondent registered the disputed domain name in October 2017, the Panel in its discretion under its general powers pursuant to paragraphs 10 and 12 of the UDRP Rules has for the benefit of the Parties reviewed archival website pages for the and domain names, which are available through the Internet Archive at <archive.org>. WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overivew 3.0”), at section 4.8. ...
2020-06-22 - Case Details
The Disputed Domain Name was not redirecting to the Complainant’s website after the Complainant’s registration expired in 2015. The Complainant’s screenshots from “archive.org” for the domain name has nothing to do with the behaviour of the Disputed Domain Name during the relevant period.
...
2020-08-20 - Case Details