About Intellectual Property IP Training Respect for IP IP Outreach IP for... IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making IP Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization WIPO and Artificial Intelligence Working at WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets Future of IP WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars IP Enforcement WIPO ALERT Raising Awareness World IP Day WIPO Magazine Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Women Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Youth Examiners Innovation Ecosystems Economics Finance Intangible Assets Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism Music Fashion PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center World Intangible Investment Highlights WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Webcast WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Tailored Initiatives & Projects Collaborative Forums & Dialogues Innovation, Creativity and Development Acceleration Program IP for Impact National IP Strategies Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program IP Commercialization WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Global Forum on IP and AI AI Infrastructure Interchange AI Tools & Services Staff Positions Affiliated Personnel Positions Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

Full Text Search on WIPO Panel Decisions

Found 60700   document(s)s (0.073 sec)

Rows

<<  <  60201 - 60220  >  >>

WIPO Domain Name Decision DEU2021-0036 for enelstations.eu, enelxstation.eu html (13 KB)

Pursuant to Article 21(1) of the Commission Regulation (EU) No. 874/2004 and Paragraph B(11)(d)(1)(i)-(iii) of the ADR Rules, the Panel finds that: The disputed domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a name in respect of which a right or rights are recognized or established by national law of a Member State and / or European Union law. ...

2022-02-22 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-0916 for marshall-headphones.com, marshall-headphones.info html (13 KB)

This Panel is satisfied, in view of the evidence submitted and on balance that the disputed domain names are indeed subject to a common control. B. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has established rights in the MARSHALL and MARSHALL HEADPHONES trademarks. ...

2020-05-27 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision DCO2020-0063 for onatera.co html (13 KB)

Respondent Except for the prior Complaint communications between the Parties, the Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions. 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar Once the ccTLD “.co” is ignored (which is appropriate in this case), the disputed domain name consists of the Complainant’s registered word trademark ONATERA in its entirety. ...

2020-12-01 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-3201 for stlmgac.org html (13 KB)

Respondent The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions. 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar As is explained in section 1.3 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”), to establish unregistered or common law trademark rights, the complainant must show that its mark has become a distinctive identifier which consumers associate with the complainant’s goods and/or services. ...

2021-02-24 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2016-1624 for careflight.org html (13 KB)

On July 1, 2016, CFQld changed its name to Lifeflight Australia Limited. 5. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar There is no dispute between the Complainant and Careflight Limited that the Complainant is the owner of trademark rights in CAREFLIGHT or that the disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s trademark. ...

2016-12-13 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2016-1822 for bougicord.com html (13 KB)

In circumstances that the Respondent has not objected to this request, has not participated in the proceeding in any way, and in the interests of efficiency and the cost effectiveness of these proceedings, the Panel accedes to the Complainant’s request and orders that the proceeding should be in the English language. 6.2. Substantive Issues A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has demonstrated that it owns registered trade mark rights for its BOUGICORD mark as set out above and in particular, the International registration 259935 registered in 1962 and French trade mark registration number 1380504 filed in 1986. ...

2016-11-11 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2018-1808 for asianet.net html (13 KB)

Respondent The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions. 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has established rights in the mark ASIANET by virtue of its Indian registered trade marks. ...

2018-10-02 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2018-0081 for balmain.link html (13 KB)

The Panel therefore concludes that it would be appropriate for English to be adopted as the language of the proceeding. 6.2. Substantive Issues A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is identical to the BALMAIN trade mark in which the Complainant has rights. ...

2018-03-09 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2018-1660 for baha-mar.info html (13 KB)

The Panel thus determines that the above circumstances entitle the Complainants to bring this Complaint against the Respondent. 6.2. Substantive Matters A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Panel is satisfied that the Complainants have registered trademark rights in the BAHA MAR mark. ...

2018-10-12 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2017-1576 for aldez.com html (12 KB)

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 registered rights in the ALDEZ mark by virtue of United States trade mark registration number 5198213 which was filed on March 24, 2016 and registered on May 9, 2017. ...

2017-10-11 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2005-0319 for bancomat.biz, bancomat.org html (14 KB)

Respondent The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions.   6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The domain names and are identical to the Complainant’s trademark BANCOMAT (the gTLDs .org and .biz cannot be taken into consideration when judging identity or similarity). ...

2005-06-16 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2009-1155 for germanwings.mobi html (12 KB)

Thus the Panel holds that whether or not the Complainant initiated sunrise proceedings is not relevant for the present proceeding. A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The disputed domain name is identical to the mark GERMANWINGS, of which the Complainant is a licensee. ...

2009-10-27 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2007-0471 for symbility.com html (14 KB)

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; and (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. ...

2007-06-29 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2014-1083 for osram.lighting html (14 KB)

Complainant The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical to certain of its registered trademarks and confusingly similar to others, that the Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name, and that the Respondent registered and has used the disputed domain name in bad faith. ...

2014-08-13 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision DCC2011-0006 for ibm.cc html (12 KB)

Respondent The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s contentions. 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The test of identity or confusing similarity under the Policy is confined to a comparison of the disputed domain name and the trademark alone, independent of the products for which the domain name is used or other marketing and use factors usually considered in trademark infringement. ...

2012-01-17 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2009-1783 for higeen.com html (13 KB)

The Respondent further denied any claims of receipt or knowledge of any cease and desist letter from the Complainant at any time. 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The disputed domain name is found to be identical to the registered trademark of the Complainant even with any stylized usage or logo additions. ...

2010-03-19 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2009-1408 for schladming.com html (13 KB)

Discussion and Findings Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy directs that the Complainant must prove each of the following: (i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and (ii) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and (iii) the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. ...

2010-01-25 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision DFR2009-0038 for legoworld.fr html (13 KB)

D2008-1836 “The domain name incorporates a non-distinctive word and is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trade marks.” - Tiffany (NJ) LLC, Tiffany and Company v. Thomas Stanek, WIPO Case No. ...

2010-02-18 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2014-1901 for wup.com html (13 KB)

Accordingly, the Panel refuses to admit this supplemental filing into the record and notes that the Respondent’s subsequent email, which also adds nothing to the proceedings, will also not be admitted to the record. B. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has demonstrated that it owns a German federal registered trade mark for the WUP word mark under registration number 302014 026280 and that this registration dates from 14 April, 2014. ...

2014-12-19 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision DES2014-0004 for berker.es html (13 KB)

The Panel holds that the Respondent cannot consistent with the Policy shield its conduct by closing it eyes to whether the domain name it is registering is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark of another. See Media General Communications, Inc. v. Rarenames, WebReg, WIPO Case No. ...

2014-03-27 - Case Details