Complainant
Spencer asserts that (i) the three contested domain names are identical or confusingly similar to service marks in which it has rights; (ii) Absolute has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain names; and (iii) that the domain names were registered and are being used by Absolute in bad faith.
...The Panel also finds that the contested aladdinbailbonds domain names are identical to Spencer’s ALADDIN BAIL BONDS mark, and are confusingly similar to both of Complainant’s ALADDIN BAIL BONDS and ALADDIN marks. Therefore, paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy has been satisfied.
...
2001-09-13 - Case Details
Identical or Confusingly Similar to a Trademark or Service Mark in which the Complainant has Rights
The Complainant is the registered owner of the well-known trademark GE in the United States in a number of diverse classes. ...Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy is not limited to registered trademarks
The Panel considers that the domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered trademark GE and its unregistered trademark WOODCHESTER, which have been used in combination by the Complainant’s subsidiary in Ireland.
...
2001-11-01 - Case Details
Cyberguard asserts that
Cyber Surveillance adopted the confusingly similar domain name in question long
after Cyberguard’s first use and United States federal registration of the Cyberguard
mark. ...Complainant
Cyberguard asserts that
the contested domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the CYBERGUARD
trademark in which Cyberguard has rights; that Cyber Surveillance has no rights
or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and that the contested
domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2001-10-26 - Case Details
Alternatively, it contends that the subject domain name "… is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark in that the mark is entirely incorporated into the domain name".
...Whether a domain name is confusingly similar is an objective inquiry related to the mark and the domain name and is not anchored in the activities of the parties.
...
2001-10-18 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
Complainant asserts:
(i) The Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s name and pending trademark. Complainant sent a protest letter to the Respondent by e-mail and certified mail notifying Respondent that Complainant owned the GROW mark and demanding that Respondent surrender the Disputed Domain Name because it is confusingly similar to Complainant’s GROW trademark.
...Thus, the Panel finds for the Complainant on the first element, that Respondent’s domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
(ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name.
...
2001-11-01 - Case Details
As a result, the name STANSTED AIRPORT has sufficient secondary association with the Complainant for common law rights to exist under the law of England and Wales.
The disputed domain name is also confusingly similar to the Registered Trade Mark in that the Registered Trade Mark contains the element STANSTED, which is identical to an element of the disputed domain name. ...D2001-1121) and the cases
there cited.
The Panel finds the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered trademark BAA STANSTED and Device.
The Complainant has established this element.
...
2002-01-25 - Case Details
ii) Registration for the purpose of preventing the owner of an identical or confusingly similar trademark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided the respondent has engaged in a pattern of such conduct.
...According to this provision, registration for the purpose of preventing the owner of an identical or confusingly similar trademark from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name, provided the respondent has engaged in a pattern of such conduct shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith.
...
2001-01-16 - Case Details
Complainant alleges that passive holding of these names constitutes a violation of paragraph 4(b)(ii) of the Policy since these names are identical or confusingly similar to the trademarks of others.
Complainant states that Respondent has used the domain name "verasign.com" to resolve to a web site entitled "Onlinemalls.com". ...Footnote 6) The Panel determines that the disputed domain names "veresign.com" and "verasign.com" are confusingly similar to "VERISIGN" in the sense of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy.
Complainant has met the burden of proving that Respondent is the registrant of domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights, and it has thus established the first of the three elements necessary to a finding that Respondent has engaged in abusive domain name registration.
...
2001-02-05 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
(i) Complainant
The Complainant alleges that the Domain Names are identical or confusingly similar to the Guerlain trademark. It points out that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name. ...The two Domain Names and are therefore to be considered as confusingly similar to the Guerlain trademark in the sense of Article 4 (a) (i) of the Policy.
(ii) Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Panel does not have any evidence that Complainant has licensed or otherwise permitted Respondent to use its trademark or to apply for the Domain Name incorporating this mark.
...
2001-03-06 - Case Details
These elements are that:
(i) Respondent’s domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;
(ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(iii) Respondent’s domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...Decision
As to the requested relief in these proceedings, Complainant has proved the necessary element that the name is identical or confusingly similar to its trademark or service mark. Complainant, however, has not shown that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name and that Respondent registered the domain name in bad faith and is using it in bad faith. ...
2001-02-12 - Case Details
Boutique" is a general term commonly used in order to indicate the shop through which fashion products are commercialized.
The Panelist finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademarks since the word "boutique" is directly related to the Complainant’s business and therefore the combination with Etro is clearly confusing (Yahoo! ...Decision
The Panelist decides that: (a) the domain name "etroboutique.com" is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered trademarks; (b) Respondents have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name "etroboutique.com"; and (c) the domain name "etroboutique.com" has been registered and is being used in bad faith by the Respondents.
...
2000-12-14 - Case Details
The textual element of this trademark is clearly identical to the domain name and is confusingly similar to . The Respondent’s assertion that that the Complainant has no “international rights” to such trademark is without merit: The requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is met if a Complainant shows that it owns a trademark in any country. ...Therefore, the Panel finds that the Complainant has shown that both domain names at issue are confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
D. Rights or Legitimate Interests
The file shows that the parties have some history of conflict between them. ...
2004-06-21 - Case Details
Complainant
Essentially, the contentions of the Complainant are as follows:
The Disputed Domain Names wholly incorporate the Complainant's FREELOTTO and FREELOTTO.COM marks, trade names, and domain names, and are confusingly similar to the marks, trade names, and domain names of the Complainant;
The Respondents have no rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Names; and
The Respondents have registered and are using the Disputed Domain Names in bad faith.
...D2000-0140 (April 24, 2000) notes that under the Policy, even if the respondent is in default,
"…the complainant must prove that each of these three elements are present."
6.3 Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant claims and has established first use and ownership of the FREELOTTO marks. ...
2001-07-11 - Case Details
Discussion and
Findings
Domain Names Identical
or Confusingly Similar to Complainant’s Mark
6.1. In relation
to the domain name , the relevant part of this
domain name is "fairmonthotels". ...Accordingly, this Administrative Panel finds that both the
domain names the subject of this Complaint are confusingly similar to
a trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
Respondent’s Rights
or Legitimate Interests in the Domain Names
6.2. ...
2001-05-23 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant requests the Panel to direct that be transferred to the Complainant based on the following arguments:
Identical or confusingly similar
The Complainant is of the opinion that the disputed domain is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark for the following reasons: the disputed domain name incorporates the entire "DVLA" trademark of Complainant and the addition of the word "registrations" after the "DVLA" trademark in the disputed domain name is referencing to the Complainant's activity of issuing, managing and selling vehicle registration numbers.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name incorporates Complainant's registered trademark "DVLA"
in its entirety. ...
2004-06-04 - Case Details
Complainant
The domain name "musclenfitness.com" is the same as or is confusingly similar to the MUSCLE & FITNESS mark registered to and used by Complainant on magazines and on-line magazines. ...The panel finds the disputed domain name to be virtually identical and to be confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark. The Complainant has established this element.
Illegitimacy
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy sets out, without limitation, circumstances which, if proved, establish a registrant’s rights or legitimate interests to a disputed domain name. ...
2001-03-20 - Case Details
A Identical or confusing similarity
It is prima facie obvious that the Domain Name is identical to the Complainant’s WOMEN ON WAVES mark and, therefore, that they are confusingly similar.
B Rights or Legitimate Interest of the Respondent
The Respondent has not filed a Response and does not appear to have any rights or legitimate interest in the Domain Name.
...Decision
In the light of the foregoing, the panelist decides that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark and the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests relating to the Domain Name which was registered and used in bad faith.
...
2001-02-02 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
The Complainant alleges in summary:
(a) The disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark in that there is added to the mark generic terms, i.e., sex, auction and the number 4.
...The domain names "ebay4sex.com" and "ebaysexauction.com" in the judgment of the Panel, are confusingly similar to the mark. The addition of the generic words does not detract from the potential to confuse Internet users.
...
2001-01-18 - Case Details
Secondly, according
to Complainant, the fact that some domain names registered by Namezero, which
are (confusingly) similar to some famous trademarks are redirected to Mr. Edens’
website (www.thelighted.com) is indication that the Respondent has registered
the domain name in order to prevent Complainant from reflecting its trade mark
in a corresponding domain name and that Respondent has engaged in a pattern
of such behaviour.
...Respondent states that before Complainant contacted Respondent for the
first time he used test pages as a website.
7.Discussion and Findings
a.Trademark rights
Complainant
has provided sufficient evidence of its rights to the trademark ROBEIN in the
Benelux.
b.Identical or confusingly
similar
The domain name
is clearly confusingly similar to Complainant's trademark ROBEIN.
...
2001-05-03 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
In order to succeed in its Complaint the Complainant has to show the following
elements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy"),
paragraph 4 (a):-
(i) The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade
mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
(ii) The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect
of the domain name.
...The Panel proposed to deal with each of these elements in turn.
(i) The domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade
mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
The Complainant contends that the relevant part of the domain name "Telstra
International" is confusingly similar to the name Telstra which is the subject
of the extensive portfolio of trade marks "Telstra" referred to above.
...
2002-06-05 - Case Details