Therefore,
and in consideration to the Complaint’s compliance with the formal requirements
for this domain dispute proceeding, to the factual evidence and legal contentions
that were submitted, to the confirmation of the presence of each of the elements
contemplated in Paragraph 4(a)(i), (ii), and (iii) of the Policy, and on the
basis of the statements and documents submitted and in accordance with the Policy,
the Rules and other applicable rules and principles of law, as directed by paragraph
15(a) of the Rules, it is found:
1. that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s POLO Marks;
2. that the Respondent has rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name; and
3. that the Domain Name was not registered and is not being used in bad faith by the Respondent.
...Identidad o similitud hasta el punto de causar confusión
Examen de los requisitos que debe cumplir la demanda de acuerdo con el apartado 4.a) de la Política.
4a)(i) Que el nombre de dominio registrado por el demandado es idéntico, o similar hasta el punto de crear confusión con respecto a una marca de productos o de servicios sobre la que el demandante tiene derechos;
Este Panel ha encontrado que existe semejanza en grado de confusión entre el nombre de dominio y la marca "INTERLAW" de la Demandante. ...
2003-05-07 - Case Details
Complainant
The Complainant asserts rights in the CASHIES trade mark and alleges that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trade mark.
The Complainant alleges that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name.
...
2015-03-02 - Case Details
The Panel has therefore determined that English should be the language of this proceeding.
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has rights in the mark DELTA SONIC by virtue of its continuous use of the mark in US interstate commerce since 1967 and the US trade mark registration for that term in connection with the goods and services detailed therein. ...
2015-12-07 - 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 names and 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 Community law.
...
2018-03-02 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
Under paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, Complainant carries the burden of proving:
(i) that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in
which Complainant has rights;
(ii) that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and
(iii) that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2025-02-05 - Case Details
Pursuant to 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.
...
2024-04-04 - 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...
2018-09-17 - 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 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.
...
2021-01-29 - Case Details
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks COLAS RAIL and COLAS; 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.
...
2020-12-02 - Case Details
In order to be successful, the Complainant has the burden of proving, on the balance of probabilities, that all three elements are present.
11.2 Domain Names identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s Marks
The domain name in dispute is videonet.com. The Mark owned by the Complainant is VIDEONET. ...
2000-07-25 - Case Details
Those requirements 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.
...
2002-03-19 - Case Details
Regarding the elements of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, the Complainant maintains that the disputed domain name incorporates its WHARTON mark in its entirety, and is identical or confusingly similar to the mark. The Complainant contends that the content of the Respondent’s website as of May 10, 2007 does not evince the Respondent’s exercise of a legitimate right in the disputed domain name, but instead evinces the Respondent’s attempt to profit from and exploit the goodwill established by the Complainant in its well known WHARTON mark. ...
2007-10-23 - Case Details
These elements are set forth in Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy:
(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; and
(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 is being used in bad faith.
...
2001-04-12 - Case Details
It is clear from the wording of the Uniform Policy,
as well as from numerous cases decided under the Policy, that there can be such
bad faith where the domain name is used in relation to an offering of goods
or services quite different from those in relation to which the Complainant’s
trademark is registered.
Identical or Confusingly
Similar Domain Name
6.3.In relation to
the domain name "harveynorman.com", the relevant part of this domain
name is "harveynorman". ...
2000-09-28 - Case Details
The burden for the Complainant, under paragraph 4(a) of the 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; and
- that the Respondent has no legitimate rights or interests in
respect of the domain name; and
- that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad
faith.
...
2002-05-16 - Case Details
Substantive issues
To qualify for cancellation or transfer, a Complainant must prove each element of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, namely:
(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 domain name; and
(iii) the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2002-02-14 - 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; 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.
...
2003-04-30 - Case Details
The disputed domain name is virtually identical to the FORDDIRECT mark, and confusingly similar to the
famous FORD mark. The disputed domain name incorporates these trademarks with a minor misspelling,
deleting the letter “d” in the word “direct”.
...The disputed domain
name is not primarily similar to the Complainant’s brands because it is a phrase by itself.
The Respondent has rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. ...
2022-10-21 - Case Details
Domain Admin and Tom Marks separately in section E, he concludes that the same result on the merits obtains whichever of these (or indeed anyone but a repeat Policy offender) is the actual or beneficial owner of the disputed domain name.
C. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s RIMMEL marks, and the Complainant’s evidence demonstrates beyond doubt that it has rights in those marks sufficient to invoke the Policy. ...
2014-01-30 - Case Details
Pursuant to Article 9 of the Regulation (EU) No. 2020/857 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 the national law of a Member State and/or
European Union law...
2024-02-01 - Case Details