The Complainant’s Contentions
5.1 The Complaint asserts that each of the elements specified in paragraph 4(a) of the Policy have been satisfied.
5.2 In reference to the element described in paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, the Complaint asserts that the domain names in dispute are, on their face, identical to the Marks or in any event confusingly similar to the Marks.
5.3 The Complaint asserts that consumers, and in particular consumers of children’s entertainment, upon seeing the domain names, will believe they are related to the Complainant. ...This also follows from the concluding words to paragraph 4(a).
6.2 Domain Names identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s Marks
The domain names in dispute are thewiggles.com and henrytheoctopus.com. ...
2000-04-21 - Case Details
Substantive Issues
The Complainant must establish that:
(i) the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and
(ii) the Respondents have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(iii) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
Complainant's Trademark Rights
This Administrative Panel accepts that Complainant has established that is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights but we are not satisfied that the Complainant has established the second and third elements of the proofs.
...
2000-05-24 - Case Details
Complainant
The name "WorldPhone" is identical to the complainant’s trademark, trading style and confusingly similar to the complainant’s company name.
The complainant believes that in view of the stated fact that the domain is for sale, it is apparent that the respondent has no rights to or legitimate interest in the domain name, and the domain name should be considered as having been registered in bad faith
A member of the complainant’s staff emailed the registrant’s representative during February 2000 in order to obtain more information about the asking price. ...Discussion and Findings
To qualify for cancellation or transfer, a complainant must prove each element of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, namely:
the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights; and
the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2000-11-02 - Case Details
Discussions and Findings
6.1 The Policy paragraph 4(a) provides that the Complainant must prove each of the following;
that the Respondent’s domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
the domain has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
6.2 Identical or Confusingly Similar
Notwithstanding that the registered SARADAR marks were not filed until after the domain name in issue was registered and that the SARADAR registered trademarks and limited to the territory of the Lebanon, the Panel is satisfied on the evidence before it that the SARADAR name and mark has been used by the Complainants and particularly the Banque Saradar Complainant, for very many years, both in Lebanon and internationally, and that the Complainants have rights in the SARADAR mark for the purposes of paragraph 4a(i) of the Policy. ...
2000-11-23 - Case Details
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy directs that the Complainant must prove each of the following:
1) that the domain name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
2) that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
3) that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant’s mark CLOBEX is registered and has been used in many countries around the world including the United States of America, which is indicated as one of the home countries of the Respondent.
...
2002-05-29 - Case Details
In order to obtain the relief requested under the Policy, Complainant must prove in the Administrative Proceeding that each of the three elements of paragraph 4(a) are present:
(i) that the Domain Name registered by the Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights;
6.1 The Domain Names are identical to the Complainant’s trademarks, and the Respondent does not dispute this.
...The Respondent says it has
a legitimate right to sell the trade-named pharmaceutical products Taxotere
and Anzemet, manufactured by the Complainant which the Respondent has acquired,
not from the Complainant, and therefore it is allowed to use Domain Names which
are identical or confusingly similar to the trademarks owned by the Complainant.
The Complainant disputes this.
While the selling of goods which originate from the Complainant might entitle
the Respondent to use a mark associated with these goods in connection with
their sale, this does not give it the right to register and use the mark as
a Domain Name without the consent of the holders of the trademarks. ...
2002-05-27 - Case Details
Respondent holds that he does not know about Complainant
and its business.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant has documented that it is the owner of registered trademarks for MUGLER, and the Panel thus finds that Complainant’s trade mark and the domain name in question are identical.
...
2005-02-08 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant has trademark rights in the SWAROVSKI mark in connection with its cut crystal, glass and gem-stone business. ...
2008-03-06 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant's contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant submits that the Domain Name is identical to the trade mark CRUFTS, save for the non distinctive domain name suffix “.tv”. ...
2009-04-17 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainants’
contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The second level of the domain name is identical to the name BRITISH MUSEUM, in which the Complainants have exclusive common law and registered trademark rights. ...
2007-04-26 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant's contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant's rights in the IKEA mark are uncontestable. As it can be seen from the Romanian and other foreign registrations of the mark, such registrations cover furniture, including sofas, chairs, stools, tables, desks, shelves, cupboards, chests of drawers and beds, mattresses, hallstands; bars for wall; frames, mirrors, rods for curtains and galleries, pillows; apparatus for lighting, including accessories for lighting and illuminators; lamp shades; heating installations, cooking, refrigerating and sanitary installations; textiles, bed and table covers; carpets, rugs, mats and other materials for covering existing floors; wall hangings (non-textile); small household utensils; containers (not of precious metal or coated therewith); combs and sponges; brushes (except paint brushes); articles and materials for cleaning purposes; glassware, porcelain and earthenware.
...
2006-04-21 - 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 in the Panel's view made out its case that it has developed a protectable goodwill and reputation which attaches to its EDISON INVESTMENT RESEARCH name and mark since 2003. ...
2010-06-09 - Case Details
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its CAJA MADRID marks and argues that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the domain name, and has registered and is using the domain name in bad faith. ...
2009-06-10 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Panel finds it fairer as a whole to render this decision in English.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has demonstrated with supporting evidence that it has trademark rights in the mark GASTROPANEL. ...
2009-01-30 - Case Details
As support, Complainant notes that it owns at least 1,515 registrations in at least 184 countries or geographic regions worldwide for trademarks that consist of or contain the mark HOLIDAY INN, and is the registrant of at least 950 domain names that consist of or contain the mark HOLIDAY INN or variations thereof;
- The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s HOLIDAY INN trademarks because it contains Complainant’s trademark plus the descriptive words “vacation club”;
- Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, as Complainant has never assigned, granted, licensed, sold, transferred or in any way authorized Respondent to register or use any of Complainant’s trademarks in any manner;
- Respondent has never used, or made preparations to use, the disputed domain name or any name corresponding to the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services;
- Respondent has never been commonly known by the disputed domain name and has never acquired any trademark or service mark rights in the disputed domain name;
- Respondent is not making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name;
- The disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith as well as primarily for the purpose of disrupting business of a competitor;
- Respondent uses the disputed domain name in connection with a website that offers services competitive with those offered by Complainant;
- Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to a website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant’s trademarks as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent’s website or of a product or service on Respondent’s website;
- Respondent knew of Complainant’s trademarks when it registered the disputed domain name;
- Complainant’s trademarks pre-date Respondent’s registration of the disputed domain name by 50 years;
- Respondent’s actions suggest opportunistic bad faith given Complainant’s established rights in its trademarks in 184 countries or geographic regions worldwide and the fact that the disputed domain name is “so obviously connected with” Complainant;
- As of the date on which the Complaint was filed, Complainant had not received a response from Respondent concerning a demand letter sent.
...
2008-07-25 - Case Details
The Complainant asserts that the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to ATLAS COPCO in that the only difference is the misspelling in the Domain Name: the addition of an extra “s”.
...
2008-09-22 - Case Details
D2000-0009 (February 29, 2000) (“In the absence of a response, it is appropriate to accept as true all allegations of the Complaint.”).
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant's mark. Indeed the addition of a country code top-level domain (ccTLD) to a mark does not avoid confusing similarity. ...
2009-12-21 - Case Details
Respondent
Respondent contends it registered the domain name in 2003 in good faith based on its Hebrew meaning to develop a site related to its principal site that was directed to children.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel accepts for the purpose of further discussion that the disputed domain name is identical in material part to Complainant’s OORAH mark.
...
2007-06-21 - Case Details
The Panel agrees fully with the Complainant’s arguments and accordingly does not consider it necessary to write a long decision.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name is made up of the Complainant’s registered trademark人头马, and the gTLD “.商城”. ...
2015-01-06 - Case Details
Complainant
Complainant argues that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to its PERKINS Mark. The Domain Name incorporates the PERKINS Mark, which is phonetically and visually identical to the Mark, and only differs from the Mark by the addition of “genset” which is an abbreviation of generator sets or generators. ...
2015-04-08 - Case Details