The Complainant’s corporate domain name used at that time would be “covea.fr” registered in 2000 but according to Archive.org, this domain name pointed to an under construction page until June 12, 2008.
The Complainant clearly knew the registration process on various domain names but chose not to register the domain name in issue. ...
2011-05-24 - Case Details
It asserts that any inconsistency between the Respondent’s memory,
the archive.org records and the assertions in the Complainant’s supplementary
submission is no indication, however, that Webmasters in any way attempted to
mislead this Panel. ...
2004-01-20 - Case Details
In Respondent’s February 6, 2021 submission, Respondent makes the assertion that “Archive.org evidence is unreliable prior to 2018”. Respondent does not explain why this is so, or on what basis the statement is made. ...
2021-02-18 - Case Details
Consequently, the Panel is satisfied that Complainant has rights in the trademark registration for the KENTECH mark through its subsidiary for purposes of this proceeding.
2 The Panel in its discretion under its general powers pursuant to paragraphs 10 and 12 of the UDRP Rules has reviewed archival website pages for the domain name which are available through the Internet Archive at <archive.org>. WIPO Overview 3.0 at paragraph 4.8. The earliest record for is from June 2003 and shows a landing page that allows a web user to enter the websites of two different companies (Kentech and Dornan). ...
2019-09-11 - Case Details
De las evidencias aportadas por la Demandante en su escrito de Demanda se encuentran tres capturas de pantalla obtenidas a través de "Archive.org". Una captura de pantalla de 31 de octubre de 2007 en la que se indica un redireccionamiento desde el nombre de dominio en disputa a "www.alojamientovip.com" y dos capturas de pantalla en las que se resuelve a una web con contenidos para adultos, una captura de fecha 20 de junio de 2012 y una captura de 18 de octubre de 2014. ...
2016-10-27 - Case Details
Please confirm that we may file such a response.”
2 “Considering the fact that the Respondent has submitted a lengthy response (20 pages with annexes), the Complainant hereby kindly asks for the Panel’s permission to submit a statement in response hereto.”
3 The Panel has undertaken limited research by visiting the website to which the disputed domain name routes, and archives of the website at <archive.org>, see WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions (“WIPO Overview 2.0”), paragraph 4.5. ...
2012-05-21 - Case Details
Further, Counsel states that pages of the Complainant’s web site, as far back as November 11, 1998, and archived by and accessible at the Internet “Archive Wayback” Machine (located at http://archive.org), also lack any reference to the Complainant’s “MESS.COM” Mark.
Lastly, the Respondent contends that the Complainant knew it had no trademark rights in the term “MESS.COM” when it applied on August 29, 2000 to register that term as its mark given its prior knowledge that the Respondent had registered that term as its domain name on March 14, 1998, some 2 1/2 years earlier.
...
2005-02-03 - Case Details
Así lo ha podido comprobar el Experto por medio del servicio de contenidos históricos de sitios web “archive.org” (disponible en “http://www.archive.org”). De hecho, con anterioridad a dicho requerimiento el sitio web conectado al Nombre de Dominio se presentaba como una plataforma de promoción cultural, pero sin referencia alguna a Antero de Quental;
- Tal y como se ha indicado al describir el estado de los Nombres de Dominio, éstos fueron puestos a la venta por el Demandado en abril de 2007. ...
2008-01-21 - Case Details
- Impresiones extraídas del sitio web “https://archive.org/web/”, de fecha 12 de marzo de 2019, en las que consta cuál era el contenido ofrecido bajo el nombre de dominio en disputa en las fechas 29 de junio de 2016, 18 de enero de 2017 y 26 de mayo de 2018. ...
2019-03-29 - Case Details
En síntesis, la Demandada no ha probado haber usado el nombre de dominio en disputa desde las fechas que alega tal uso. De hecho este Experto visitó el sitio Archive.org y pudo constatar que la constancia de uso online del nombre de dominio en disputa más antiguo data del mes de julio de 20132 . ...
2016-10-18 - Case Details
Desde la creación de los nombres de dominio en disputa, el Titular no ha hecho uso alguno de los mismos, tal y como se demuestra del resultado de consultar la herramienta en línea “Internet Archive Wayback Machine”, disponible en “http://archive.org/web/web.php”.
El Titular no ha sido conocido corrientemente por los nombres de dominio en disputa. ...
2012-11-06 - Case Details
The facts are supported by the Complainant itself, which evidently did its own ample research and in an email dated December 18, 2008 to the Respondent, said “... as near as I can tell (with various tools, including archive.org), you’ve owned this domain name straight since at least 2004, if not a couple of years before that ...”.
...
2011-03-08 - Case Details
Que los Demandados utilizan el fichero “robots.txt.” para no ser indexados por sitios como Archive.org.
Que los Demandados no se pueden escudar en la libertad de expresión, al resultar evidente que no hay una intención de crítica sino de obtención de ganancias económicas.
...
2017-01-27 - Case Details
To defend this allegation, the Respondent filed screen shots of the archived images from the Way Back Machine at <archive.org> for the disputed domain name. The screen shots show the contents of the website linked to the disputed domain name for the period December 2008 till February 2009. ...
2011-08-10 - Case Details
Also of relevance is the information contained on the “archive.org” database as to historical use of the Disputed Domain Name – see discussion below. The timeline is entirely consistent with the Respondent having applied for the trademarks when it says it did.
...
2021-12-16 - Case Details
Screenshots produced by the Complainant show that, at various times during February and March 2008, the website at the disputed domain name being used as a parking page with links relating to zip, file converters and other kinds of software.
Archive.org screenshots produced by the Respondent show extracts from motor services-related websites at the disputed domain name at various times starting from May 2008.
...
2015-06-15 - Case Details
Furthermore, the Complainant’s alleged investigations regarding the holder of the
Disputed Domain Name are not provided, in fact the Complainant intentionally avoided to conduct and/or
present results of obvious relevant searches available using the Google engine, such as the LinkedIn page
of Mr. C. F., or captures available at Archive.org. website.
With regard to the identity or confusing similarity of the Disputed Domain Name and the Complainant’s mark,
the Complainant supports it owns rights in OLA for a ridesharing service in India, which did not exist at time
Mr. ...
2025-07-28 - Case Details
D2023-1321 in this regard – see
discussion below.
The Complainant produces a screenshot from <archive.org> showing how it used the Disputed Domain
Name in 2013 in relation to a website selling its products. ...
2024-11-13 - Case Details
Respondent annexed as exhibits to the Response representative publicly archived pages from the Archive.org “Wayback Machine” that present copies of the web pages that have appeared at the domain name in dispute at various times. ...
2008-03-25 - Case Details
The documents annexed to the Response (Annexes 8 and 9) do not establish this. Recourse to Archive.org and WayBackMachine do not assist either. It is therefore not possible to establish whether the present impugned activities of the Respondent (the links to the Complainant’s competitors’ products) go back to prior to 2010 or have only arisen at around the time of the two Registrant changes in April 2010 and April 2012.
...
2013-05-27 - Case Details