Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant submits that the Disputed Domain Names are identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered trademark. ...The Panel accepts that the Disputed Domain Names are identical or confusingly similar to the trademark SCHIBSTED in which the Complainant has rights. It is well established that the addition of the gTLD “.com” or “.icu” does not avoid a finding that the Disputed Domain Names are confusingly similar to the trademark SCHIBSTED.
...
2019-03-22 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant is a manufacturer and provider of infant food and dietary products for infants. ...D2000-0662, that “domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark for purposes of the Policy, ‘when the domain name includes the trademark, or a confusingly similar approximation, regardless of the other terms in the domain name’.”)
...
2019-05-16 - Case Details
The third element a complainant must establish is that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires that the Complainant establish that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights. ...The Panel finds that the addition of such terms to the Complainant’s trademark does not avoid the possibility that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s respective trademark and hence the first element of the Policy has been fulfilled.
...
2019-01-28 - Case Details
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical to and confusingly similar with the name “Hamiet Bluiett” and the common law trademark rights which he asserts in HAMIET BLUIETT. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Pursuant to paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, the Complainant must prove that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights. ...
2017-08-25 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
This element consists of two parts: first, does the Complainant have rights in a relevant trademark and, second, is the Disputed Domain Name identical or confusingly similar to that trademark.
...Moreover, the registration of a domain name that is confusingly similar to a well-known registered trademark by an entity that has no relationship to that mark may be sufficient evidence of bad faith registration and use. ...
2017-07-18 - Case Details
Complainant
Complainant contends, in relevant part, as follows:
- The Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the HAEMONETICS Trademark because “Respondent’s domain name is virtually identical to Complainant’s HAEMONETICS trademark – differing only in the addition of a second letter ‘a’ instead of the first ‘e’”, which is, by definition, typosquatting...Policy, paragraph 4(a).
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Based upon the trademark registrations cited by Complainant, it is apparent that Complainant has rights in and to the HAEMONETICS Trademark.
...
2018-01-26 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant has satisfactorily proven that it has registered trademark rights for ABSA BANK.
The Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. See Ansell Healthcare Products Inc. v. Australian Therapeutics Supplies Pty, Ltd.,
WIPO Case No. ...
2019-08-16 - Case Details
Thus, it contends the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark and that Respondent is engaging in typosquatting.
Complainant has been using one or more WAL-MART marks since 1962. ...There is a commercial activity on Respondent’s
site which appears to be confusingly similar and competitive with the Complainant’s
activities, thus intentionally diverting consumers from Complainant’s
site. ...
2005-09-20 - Case Details
The Panel is satisfied that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the GENTING mark. Previous panels have recognized that incorporating a trademark in its entirety can be sufficient to establish that a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a registered trademark. ...It is generally regarded as prima facie evidence, for a complainant to show that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to its mark, that the respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, and that the complainant has not authorized the respondent to use its mark (or an expression which is confusingly similar to its mark), whether in the disputed domain name or otherwise. ...
2009-03-19 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The dispute domain name is identical to the trademark NǛVIPHONE which has been applied for by the Complainant but not yet registered. ...However, in the Panel’s view, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the word “Nüvi” which is the Complainant’s registered trademark. The word “phone” when added to the Complainant’s registered trademark is confusingly similar to the trademarked word. ...
2008-05-15 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The first issue in this matter is whether the domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark. ...Domain
names that delete simple words or modifiers (such as the definite article “the”)
from a registered mark are considered to be confusingly similar. (See Playboy
Enterprises International, Inc. v. Hector Rodriguez, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1016, confusingly similar to the
mark THE PLAYBOY CHANNEL; and see Royal Bank of Canada v. ...
2006-09-11 - Case Details
The Complainant maintains that it is well-settled that the incorporation of a trademark in its entirety is sufficient to establish that a domain name is identical or confusingly similar and refers to two UDRP Decisions in that regard. The Complainant goes on to argue that the additional terms in a domain name should not affect a finding that a domain name is identical or confusingly similar.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
This question raises two issues:
(1) Does the Complainant have rights in a trade mark or service mark; and
(2) Is the Disputed Domain Name identical or confusingly similar to such trade mark or service mark.
...
2006-03-16 - Case Details
In the alternative, the Complaint argues that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade marks since that addition of “ag” and / or “.com” does not prevent a domain name from being confusingly similar to the basic trade mark to which those terms are appended.
...With that finding, it is no longer necessary to examine whether the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s other trade mark, or to examine the Complainant’s claim to unregistered rights arising through use of its company name.
...
2007-10-17 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant has established that it owns prior rights in the CLEARWATER SYSTEMS mark and the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s CLEARWATER SYSTEMS mark.
...D2000-0666 (finding that the combination of a geographic term with an established trademark does not prevent a domain name from being found confusingly similar); Cellular One Group v. Paul Brien,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0028 (finding that the addition of the geographic country descriptor “china” to form was confusingly similar to the CELLULAR ONE trademark); CMGI, Inc. v. ...
2014-08-04 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires the Complainant to show that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
...The Panel therefore finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to many registered trademarks in which Complainant has rights. Thus, the requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2013-10-28 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that:
- the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark BRADESCO, registered in Brazil under No. 007.170.424, in which the Complainant has prior and unencumbered rights, as the disputed domain name reproduces the Complainant’s trademark BRADESCO and is therefore confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark...The Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the BRADESCO trademark as the disputed domain name reproduces the Complainant’s trademark BRADESCO, registered in Brazil under No. 007.170.424, and is also confusingly similar to the domain names previously registered by the Complainant. ...
2015-09-03 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has submitted detailed evidence that it is the owner of numerous trademarks for T-MOBILE.
...Previous UDRP panels have consistently held that domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark for purposes of the Policy, “when the domain name includes the trademark, or a confusingly similar approximation, regardless of the other terms in the domain name” (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2015-11-26 - Case Details
That said, the Panel finds that this is a clear case of domain name abuse as shown herein.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires a two-fold enquiry - a threshold investigation into whether a complainant has rights in a trade mark, followed by an assessment of whether the trade mark and domain name are identical or confusingly similar.
...The remaining question is whether the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. For the purposes of testing confusing similarity, the generic top-level domain, “.com,” can be ignored4. ...
2011-01-27 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant clearly holds rights in the registered marks RUGBY WORLD CUP and RUGBY WORLD CUP 2011. The next issue under this head is whether the Domain Name is confusingly similar to these marks. The Panel concludes that the Domain Name may be somewhat similar to these marks, but not confusingly so. ...
2011-11-14 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant owns many trademark registrations for the trademark TYSON in the U.S. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant does have trademark rights in the mark TYSON by virtue of U.S. ...
2011-12-14 - Case Details