A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel concludes that Complainant has unregistered trademark rights in the trademark VOLTAGE FINANCE through use demonstrated in the record. The Panel also concludes that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to that mark. The VOLTAGE FINANCE mark is clearly recognizable within the Domain Name. ...
2021-01-20 - Case Details
The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name incorporates its ROCKSTAR GAMES trademark in its entirety and is confusingly similar to that trademark.
The Complainant submits that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s trademark ROCKSTAR GAMES. ...
2021-03-23 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel concludes that Complainant has rights in the mark BEAUTY BAY through registration and use demonstrated in the record. The Panel also finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to that mark. The Domain Name incorporates the BEAUTY BAY mark in its entirety and adds the letters “bh”, which appear to be associated with or suggestive of Bahrain. ...
2020-09-24 - Case Details
Global Net 2000, Inc,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0441.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Domain Name incorporates the whole of the Complainant’s ATRIUM INNOVATIONS trademark, adding a hyphen between the two words, which does nothing to distinguish the Domain Name from the mark. ...The Panel finds the Domain Name to be virtually identical and thus confusingly similar to the ATRIUM INNOVATIONS trademarks in which the Complainant has rights.
The Complainant has established this element.
...
2020-07-23 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Once the gTLD “.org” is ignored (which is appropriate in this case), the disputed domain name consists of the whole of the Complainant’s registered word trademark ELECTROLUX followed by the word “group”. ...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Respondent is not a licensee of, or otherwise affiliated with, the Complainant, and has not been authorized by the Complainant to use its ELECTROLUX trademark. ...
2020-05-01 - Case Details
The Complainant’s mark is recognizable within the Disputed Domain Names and the added terms do not prevent a finding of confusingly similar to that mark in the Panel’s opinion. See section 1.8 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”).
The Panel finds that the Complainant has demonstrated that the Disputed Domain Names are identical or confusingly similar to a service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Disputed Domain Names redirect to the Complainant’s website.
...
2020-06-12 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel concludes that Complainant has rights in the mark SWISS CASINOS and SWISSCASINO through registration and use demonstrated in the record. The Panel also finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to those marks. The only non-trivial difference between the marks (one of which refers to casino in the singular and one of which refers to casinos in the plural) and the Domain Name is the latter’s addition of the dictionary word “online”. ...
2020-06-23 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
On the basis of the above evidence of registered trade marks for ORKIN and ORKIN plus device in the Unites States, India, and elsewhere in the world, the Panel finds that the Complainant has registered rights in those marks.
...Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trade mark ORKIN in which the Complainant has rights.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Complainant argues that there is no evidence of the Respondent providing any services or business under the marks ORKIN or ORKINN prior to the registration of the disputed domain name.
...
2020-06-22 - Case Details
Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainants trademark because it incorporates Complainant’s trademark and only adds the generic word “energy” plus the geographic designation “us” and generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”).
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
In this case the disputed domain name incorporates Complainant’s VALERO trademark in its entirety plus the descriptive term “energy” and the geographical designation “us”. ...
2020-06-19 - Case Details
The addition of the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) designation “.com” does not differentiate the disputed domain name from the MELTEV trademark in any meaningful manner, and is therefore confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark.
The Complainant contends that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant does have trademark rights in the trademark MELTEV by virtue of the registration and allowed application listed in section 4 of this Decision. ...
2020-05-28 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to the Trade Mark, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names, and the disputed domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith.
...Having considered all the matters above, the Panel determines under paragraph 11(a) of the Rules that the language of the proceeding shall be English.
6.2 Substantive Elements of the Policy
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant has rights in the Trade Mark acquired through use and registration.
...
2020-04-23 - Case Details
Complainant
Complainants allege that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the marks SWATCH GROUP and SWATCH. Complainants point out that the disputed domain name incorporates in full the term “swatchgroup” together with descriptive (“accounting”) and generic (“.com”) terms.
...The Panel finds that the disputed domain name, is confusingly similar to the marks SWATCH and SWATCH GROUP. The disputed domain name incorporates both marks in full, adding only a dictionary term. ...
2020-03-18 - Case Details
Lorna Kang,
WIPO Case No. D2002-1064.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has rights in the TOMMY BAHAMA mark that predate registration of the Disputed Domain Name in 2020. ...The Panel finds that the Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the TOMMY BAHAMA mark in which the Complainant has rights, under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
...
2020-04-17 - Case Details
The Complainant argues that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. The Domain Name incorporates the Complainant’s trademark in its entirety, in combination with the descriptive terms “cheap” and “parts”. ...Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has established that it has rights in the trademark BMW.
The test for confusing similarity involves the comparison between the trademark and the Domain Name. ...
2017-06-06 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
Under article 2.1 of the Regulations, in order for a complainant to acquire a domain name, it must prove that three cumulative conditions are met:
a. the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or trade name, protected under Dutch law in which the complainant has rights; and
b. the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
c. the domain name has been registered or is being used in bad faith.
Article 10.3 of the Regulations provides that in the event that a respondent fails to submit a response, the complaint shall be granted unless the panel considers it to be without basis in law or fact.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The requirements under article 2.1(a) under I of the Regulations is met, when a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or trade name protected under Dutch law in which the complainant has rights.
...
2016-09-29 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has demonstrated that it owns European Union trade mark registrations for its XLOVE and XLOVECAM marks as set out above. ...As a result the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered trade marks and the Complaint succeeds under this element of the Policy.
...
2016-09-27 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant alleges that the disputed domain name is identical or at least confusingly similar to its world-renowned trademark BINKY, that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name; and that the Respondent has registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant holds trademark registrations for the BINKY trademark for eight decades. ...
2016-09-21 - Case Details
Complainant
According to Complainant, the Disputed Domain Name is identical to Complainant’s MCKINSEY trademark and confusingly similar to its MCKINSEY & COMPANY trademarks, plus the generic “.careers” generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) extension which cannot be taken into consideration when judging confusing similarity.
...The registration of a domain name which is identical or confusingly similar to a widely-known trademark has repeatedly been found to establish a respondent’s bad faith in registration and use (see Compagnie Générale des Etablissements Michelin v. ...
2016-09-19 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar or identical to the Trade Mark, the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name, and the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
...In all the circumstances, the Panel determines under paragraph 11(a) of the Rules that the language of the proceeding shall be English.
6.2 Substantive Elements of the Policy
The Complainant must prove each of the three elements in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy in order to prevail.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant has rights in the Trade Mark acquired through use and registration which predate the date of registration of the disputed domain name by several decades.
...
2016-09-15 - Case Details
Therefore, it is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark. Complainant cites UDRP precedents to support its position.
Complainant states that it has no business or other relationship with Respondent. ...Freak Films Oy,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0109.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name incorporates Complainant’s mark in its entirety and adds the geographic descriptor “fr”. ...
2016-09-12 - Case Details