Pursuant to Article 21(1) of the Commission Regulation (EU) No. 874/2004 and Article B(11)(d)(1)(i)-(iii) of the ADR Rules, the Panel finds that:
the disputed domain name is 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 Community law;
Respondent has rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name because Respondent has legitimate business in Romania since 1995 selling IT services;
Respondent has not registered and is not using the disputed domain name in bad faith.
6. ...
2018-09-27 - Case Details
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 name is 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 Community law...
2018-08-10 - Case Details
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 name is 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 Community law. ...
2019-01-23 - Case Details
It further confirms that it has not used the website at the disputed domain name since receiving correspondence from the Complainant’s agents on January 29, 2020, that the website cannot be found on any search engine and that it has engaged a web designer to work on a new website, namely “Best of Sewage Treatment Accessories”.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has demonstrated that it owns European trade mark registration 7070485 for BOSTA which the Panel notes was filed on July 9, 2008, and registered on February 26, 2010. ...
2020-08-07 - Case Details
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark KPMG registered in the European Union; the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and, the disputed domain name was registered as well as used in bad faith.
...
2020-05-12 - Case Details
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 name is 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.
...
2020-10-22 - Case Details
This also follows from the concluding words to paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
6.2 Domain name identical or confusingly similar to the Complainants’ Marks
The domain name in dispute is "bettinaliano.com". The Complainants’ TradeMarks are the words Bettina Liano in one case accompanied by graphic matter to form a device mark. ...
2000-10-24 - Case Details
Applicable Disputes – Paragraph 4(a)
Regarding sub-paragraph 4(a)(i), the Panel is satisfied that the Complainant has clearly proved through its evidence that the domain name is substantially identical or confusingly similar to "ABEBOOKS.COM" in which the Complainant has established rights in Australia and internationally well before any reputation, if any, that might be supposed to have been derived by commencement of the Respondent using a website.
...
2003-11-17 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
Paragraph 4.a. of the Policy directs that Stella D’oro must prove each of the following:
(i) The domain name in issue is identical or confusingly similar to Stella D’oro’s trademark and service mark, and
(ii) Patron has 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.
...
2000-02-18 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
Paragraph 4.a. of the Policy directs that Nabisco must prove, with respect to each domain name in issue, each of the following:
(i) The domain name in issue is identical or confusingly similar to the corresponding Nabisco trademark, and
(ii) Patron has 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.
...
2000-02-23 - Case Details
The burden for the Complainant, under paragraph 4(a) of the ICANN Policy, is to show:
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.
That the Respondent has no legitimate interests in respect of the domain name.
...
2000-08-29 - Case Details
D2003-0796, se señalaba:
“Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy requires, as one element to be proved, that the domain name be identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights. These words do not require that Complainant be the owner of the mark and would include, for example, a licensee of the mark. ...
2009-02-20 - Case Details
The disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s name and confusingly similar to other marks it owns because the domain name’s dominant feature is the word “align”.
...
2008-04-10 - Case Details
The Panel will therefore proceed to a decision based on the Complaint and the Response.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Several of Complainant’s marks consist of the word “SPAR”. The domain name in dispute is . ...
2005-10-28 - Case Details
To invoke the Policy, a Complainant must show that the domain name at issue is identical or confusingly similar to a mark in which the Complainant has rights, that the Respondent lacks rights or a legitimate interest in the domain name, and that the Respondent registered and used the name in bad faith. ...
2006-09-26 - Case Details
The burden for the Complainant, under paragraph 4(a) of the ICANN Policy, is to show:
- 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;
- That the Respondent has no legitimate rights or interests in respect of the domain name; and
- The domain name has been registered and used in bad faith.
...
2001-11-06 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
Domain Name is Identical or Confusingly Similar to Complainant’s Mark
6.1. In relation to the domain name , the relevant part of this domain name is "evisu". ...
2001-09-10 - Case Details
審理および認定
処理方針第４条(a)は、申立人が次の要件について立証することを求めている：
(１) 被申立人が登録したドメイン名は、申立人が権利を有する商標またはサービス・マークと同一(identical)であること、または混同を生じさせるほど類似している(confusingly
similar ) こと；
(２) 被申立人は当該ドメイン名についていかなる権利(rights)または適法な利益
(legitimate interests)も有しないこと；そして
(３) 当該ドメイン名は悪意によって (in bad faith) 登録され、かつ使用されて いること。
...
2001-07-26 - Case Details
The burden for the
Complainant under paragraph 4(a) of the Policy is to prove:
(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;
(ii) That
the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of
the domain name; and
(iii) That
the domain name has been registered and used in bad faith.
...
2001-06-01 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
6.1 Under paragraph 4a of the Policy, the Complainant must prove three distinct elements in order to succeed with a claim for transfer of a domain name, namely;
- that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
- that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
- that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
6.2 Domain Name identical to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights
The domain name in issue is identical with the Complainant's NICEDAY trademark. ...
2001-01-11 - Case Details