Discussions and Findings
6.1 The Policy para. 4a provides that the Complainant must prove each of the following:
h that the Respondent's domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
h the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
h the domain has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
6.2 Is a trademark required to be registered? ...
2000-05-23 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
Paragraph 4.a. of the Policy directs that General Motors must prove, with respect to the domain name in issue, each of the following:
(i) The domain name in issue is identical or confusingly similar to General Motor’s mark in issue here, and
(ii) Respondent 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.
...
2000-10-27 - Case Details
Discussion and Findings
According to paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, the Complainant must prove that
(i) The Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark 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 Domain Name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2001-01-16 - Case Details
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.
...
2002-01-10 - Case Details
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy directs that the Complainant must prove the presence of each of the following elements: (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.
...
2000-12-22 - Case Details
These elements are as follows:
(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 to the domain name; and
(iii) Respondent's
domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2002-10-15 - Case Details
And Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy states that, for a complaint to be granted, the Complainant must prove each of the following:
(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 used in bad faith.
6.2 Language and absence of a response to the Complaint by the Respondent
First of all the Panel must take into consideration the allegation made by the Respondent about the language of the proceeding and the fact of the absence of a response by the Respondent.
...
2001-12-14 - Case Details
Respondent requests the Panel to find against Complainant.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...Importantly, Complainant either reviewed the earlier cases involving Respondent in similar contexts and
elected not to disclose the outcomes in its Complaint, or perhaps listed the decisions without reviewing them.
...
2026-07-20 - Case Details
De conformidad con lo preceptuado en el párrafo 4(a) de la Política, para prevalecer en sus pretensiones, el Demandante tiene que acreditar todos y cada uno de los extremos siguientes: (i) el nombre de dominio en disputa 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; y (ii) el Demandado no tiene derechos o intereses legítimos respecto del nombre de dominio en disputa; y (iii) el nombre de dominio en disputa ha sido registrado y se utiliza de mala fe.2
B. ...D2008-0183 se establece: “The Policy was adopted to deal with the problem of cybersquatting - that is, the registration of domain names consisting of, including, or confusingly similar to marks belonging to another for the purpose of profiting from the goodwill associated with the mark”.
2 En Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. v. ...
2013-08-23 - Case Details
Bearing in mind the Panel’s observations above on the
Complainant’s ability to have inserted these details into the amended Complaint, the Panel considers that the
Complainant has already received a fair opportunity to present its case and that the Panel must now proceed
to a Decision without further delay, in order to ensure due expedition.
B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...These future business purposes are unspecified, and it is unclear to the Panel
whether the Respondent means by this statement that the proposed services will be similar to those which it
says that it currently provides. The Panel will examine whether the Respondent’s submissions might
disclose a case in terms of paragraph 4(c)(i) of the Policy, namely that before any notice to it of the dispute,
the Respondent has made use of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the disputed domain name or a
name corresponding to the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or
services. ...
2024-03-08 - Case Details
Complainant repeats that it has rights in a trademark and that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to that trademark.
Complainant reiterates that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. ...Respondent states that Complainant has failed to substantiate any claims regarding registration of additional domain names for the purpose of preventing registration by trademark owners.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain name comprises, in its entirety, Complainant’s registered PURVA trademark. ...
2014-09-23 - Case Details
In 1843, the Regional Court in Tours found against producers in the Loire Valley who were using the “Champagne” name to market their sparkling wines. A similar decision from the Court of Appeal in Angers, in 1887, set an early precedent for the “Champagne” name: “No one may understand by Champagne or Champagne wine anything other than a wine both harvested and produced in Champagne, a former, geographically determined province of France”.
...A Complainant is deemed to have rights in a geographical indication for the purposes of this Policy, if it has standing to bring an action based on the alleged infringement of the geographical indication before the courts of Ireland.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Is the word “champagne” a Protected Identifier for the Purposes of the IEDR Policy? Paragraph 1.3 of the IEDR Policy defines Protected Identifiers as including “geographical indications that can prima facie be protected in the island of Ireland. ...
2008-02-09 - Case Details
Hence, the Complainant concludes that each of the contested domain names is confusingly similar to the Complainant's mark "EBAY" under paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
2. Legitimacy
The Complainant contends, that the Respondents have no rights or legitimate interest in any of the contested domain names.
...Such is indeed the case here with respect to Complainant, eBAY Inc., and its mark "EBAY". Also, for similar holdings, see, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Walmarket Canada D2000-0150 (WIPO May 2, 2000) and Cellular One Group v. ...
2001-01-18 - Case Details
Respondent
The Respondent does not dispute that, for the limited purpose of the first element, the disputed domain
name is identical or similar to the Complainant’s registered MEDITWIN word mark but contends that the
Complainant has not satisfied the second and third elements required under the Policy for a transfer of the
disputed domain name.
...Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
It is well accepted that the first element functions primarily as a standing requirement. ...
2026-08-05 - 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.
...
2021-06-29 - Case Details
Accordingly the principles developed by panels under the UDRP are relevant and instructive in many respects.
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. ...
2012-04-30 - 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:
6. The disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the 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.
7. ...
2020-05-11 - Case Details
The Complainant says that the Disputed Domain Names are identical or confusingly similar to the SEMINOLE CASINO trademarks.
The Complainant says that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the term “seminole casino”.
...
2019-10-29 - Case Details
There are several companies/individuals who use
the word hogshead in domain names or on the net including
and .
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The indication “.tv” officially designates a domain name registered in the country code top level domain for Tuvalu. ...
2004-09-01 - Case Details
Many of the products sold or accessible at Respondent’s website are also available for license download (for a fee) through Complainant’s website, making Respondent a competitor of Complainant. Use of a confusingly similar domain name to sell goods competitive with those of the mark owner is further evidence in bad faith.
...
2007-11-21 - Case Details