Complainant
Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar or identical to Complainant’s mark and domain name because it differs only by omitting the last letter “s”.
...D2000-0716
(September 5, 2000) (finding that deleting the letter “s” from Complainant’s
Universal City Studio’s storemark did not change the overall impression
of the mark and thus made the disputed domain name confusingly similar to it).
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the mark in which Complainant has rights.
...
2004-10-27 - Case Details
Respondent’s domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s SKUNK WORKS mark.
2. Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the domain name.
3. ...Respondent’s domain name
is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark because the disputed domain
name fully incorporates Complainant’s mark and merely adds the generic
word “tractor”. ...
2005-05-26 - Case Details
The onus of proving these elements is on the complainant.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
To prove this element, the Complainant must have rights in a trademark or service mark, and the disputed domain name must be identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark or service mark.
...The Panel therefore finds that, in the circumstances of this case, the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant's ATLAS trademarks. Consequently, the Panel finds that the requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2009-02-20 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has established the fact that it has valid trademark rights for LEGO in several classes.
...The Panel therefore considers the Domain Name to be confusingly similar to the trademarks LEGO in which the Complainant has rights in accordance with paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2009-06-09 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
To satisfy this element, Complainant must establish it has rights to a trade or service mark, and that the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to such marks. ...The Panel further finds that the Domain Names are confusingly similar to Complainant's Mark. Complainant has thus satisfied its burden of proof under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2006-02-06 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that Complainant has established rights in the TELEKOM mark by its registration with various governmental authorities in accordance with Policy paragraph 4(a)(i). ...Therefore, the Panel finds that Respondent’s disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s TELEKOM mark pursuant to Policy paragraph 4(a)(i). See Space Imaging LLC v. ...
2008-06-27 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds Complainant has established common law trademark rights in SPONDA for real estate services in Finland.
...Accordingly, the Panel finds the domain name to be confusingly similar to Complainant’s SPONDA trademark.
Moreover, Respondent has admitted that the domain name is confusingly similar to the SPONDA trademark.
...
2007-06-21 - Case Details
See paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
While Zurich, Illinois and Zurich, Switzerland are not confusingly similar (except to some airport baggage handlers), the disputed domain name and Complainant’s marks certainly are confusingly similar. ...But the circumstantial case is strong: Respondent’s domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark and Respondent’s website provides numerous links to third party websites, many of which are for insurance services. ...
2007-06-15 - Case Details
Identical or Confusingly Similar
Two separate issues fall for consideration. (1) does
the Complainant have rights in the mark and (2) is the domain name identical
or confusingly similar to any such mark. ...D2005-1360.
The disputed domain name is identical and confusingly similar to Complainant’s marks. The Panel finds that paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy has been satisfied.
...
2006-12-14 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant’s submissions can be summarized as follows:
The disputed domain name is almost identical or confusingly similar to the trademark and service mark BOSCOLOTOURS, to which the Complainant has exclusive rights based on the corresponding trademark registration. ...This case is a so-called “typosquatting” case which arises where the domain name is a slight alphabetical variation from a registered mark and which may be qualified as confusingly similar.
In these circumstances, this Panel takes into account
previous UDRP decisions relating to this practice of “typosquatting”
e.g. ...
2005-11-25 - Case Details
D2001-0592 (Lack of response could be enough to find for Complainant).
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Domain Name at issue is confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights.
...This close misspelling renders the Domain Name confusingly similar to Complainant’s
trademark. Alta Vista Co. v. Yomtobian, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0937 (domain names and
are confusingly similar to trademark ALTA VISTA).
...
2006-07-18 - Case Details
It is confusingly similar to Complainant’s CIALIS trademark.
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has rights in the trademark CIALIS by virtue of its registration in the USA and elsewhere. ...
2006-06-05 - Case Details
It is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s CIALIS trademark.
The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has rights in the trademark CIALIS by virtue of its registration in the USA and elsewhere. ...
2006-05-25 - Case Details
Complainant
The Respondent’s domain name is confusingly similar to the PLAVIX trademark.
The Respondent’s domain name consists of the Complainant’s trademark with the addition of the letter “s” and the gTLD “.com. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
In order for the Complainant to successfully argue that the domain name should be transferred to the Complainant, the domain name must be identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights. ...
2006-05-19 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s
contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant relies on its registration and use of “TABASCO” and asserts that the subject domain name is identical or confusingly similar to it.
Whether a domain name is identical to a mark or is confusingly similar to a mark involves different criteria.
It is clear that the Complainant has rights to “TABASCO” through registration and use.
...
2006-08-18 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar (Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy)
6.4 This Panel believes that Complainant’s mark VALIUM is a famous mark,
known throughout the world and worthy of the highest degree of protection. ...Further, it is well established that incorporating
the entirety of a mark into a domain name is sufficient to establish that a
domain name is confusingly similar to the registered mark, see E Auto, L.L.C.
v. Triple S Auto Parts d/b/a Kung Fu Yea Enterprises, Inc., WIPO
Case No. ...
2006-03-27 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
The Complainant asserts:
- The Respondent's domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's ICQ marks.
- The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the domain name...The second requirement of this paragraph is that the domain name in issue is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s marks. On this issue, the Complainant asserts that the domain name is confusingly similar to its marks. ...
2000-11-15 - Case Details
FA0007000095105, wherein it was found that respondent’s registration of "lllbean.com" was in bad faith and confusingly similar to the complainant’s L.L. BEAN trademark.
In International Data Group, Inc. v. Maruyama & Co., Ltd., WIPO Case No. ...Farrukh Zia, WIPO Case No. D2000-0167 ("enike.com" and "e-nike.com" confusingly similar to NIKE trademark).
The Panel further finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect of the domain name "eebay.com". ...
2000-12-20 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant makes the following submissions.
Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Trade Mark. The mere addition of one letter does not negate the confusing similarity between the Disputed Domain Name and the Trade Mark.
...The onus of proving these elements is on the Complainant even though the Respondent failed to reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy provides that the Complainant must establish that the Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the Trade Mark.
...
2019-07-09 - Case Details
In the Complainants’ submission, is confusingly similar to all three LA PRESSE trademarks and is confusingly similar to both CYBERPRESSE trademarks. ...Given that in Québec the LA PRESSE mark is notoriously connected to media products and services, the result is, a disputed Domain Name that is confusingly similar to the LA PRESSE mark.
The disputed Domain Name is thus confusingly similar to a mark in which the Complainant LP has rights. ...
2008-06-13 - Case Details