About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism 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 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 Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

Full Text Search on WIPO Panel Decisions

Found 57807   document(s)s (0.036 sec)

Rows

<<  <  9221 - 9240  >  >>

WIPO Domain Name Decision DIR2021-0007 for sewco.ir html (10 KB)

Complainant The Complainant contends that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s SEW registered trade mark; that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name; and that the Domain Name has been registered in bad faith and is being used in bad faith. ...B. Identical or Confusingly Similar While the Policy is not in all respects identical to the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (“UDRP”), the two policies are sufficiently similar for it to be useful to refer where appropriate to the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0”). ...

2021-05-27 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-0750 for jdsportswear.com html (11 KB)

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has established rights in the JD SPORTS and JD trademarks. The disputed domain name consists of the JD SPORTS trademark combined with the term “wear”. ...Respondent 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar B. Rights or Legitimate Interests C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith 7. Decision...

2022-04-14 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-3851 for facebookinstagram.club, facebookmarketing.club, facebookpro.club, instagramads.club, instagramfollowers.club, instagrammarketing.club, instagrampro.club html (11 KB)

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The first three disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s FACEBOOK trademark, which through its use and recognition has become famous, in that they contain that famous mark attached to English words (“marketing” and “pro”) or another of Complainant’s trademarks (“INSTAGRAM”). The final four of the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s well known INSTAGRAM trademark attached to common English words: “ads”, “followers”, “marketing”, and “pro”. ...

2022-01-06 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2012-1881 for wwwhemnet.com html (10 KB)

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar Complainant has provided real estate listings and homes for sale since 1998. Complainant owns Swedish and CTM registrations containing HEMNET. ...Accordingly, the Panel finds that Complainant has rights in the HEMNET mark and that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark. Complainant has established the first element under paragraph 4(a) of the Policy. ...

2012-11-21 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2012-2036 for porschedesignforsale.com html (11 KB)

Complainant The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademarks PORSCHE and PORSCHE DESIGN, the registration and use of which by the Complainant long precede the registration of the disputed domain name. ...Having considered all the circumstances, this Panel determines under the Rules, paragraph 11(a) that English shall be the language of the proceeding. B. Identical or Confusingly Similar Pursuant to the Policy, paragraph 4(a)(i), a complainant must prove that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the complainant has rights. ...

2012-12-24 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2012-0837 for bloggingbarclaysbank.com html (10 KB)

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has demonstrated that it is the registered proprietor of numerous UK and Community registered trademarks which include the term “Barclay”, including BARCLAYS and BARCLAYBANK, for services including banking and financial services. ...The distinctive part of the Domain Name is “‘barclaysbank” which in the view of the Panel is undoubtedly confusingly similar to the Complainant’s marks and would be likely to be understood by Internet users to refer to those marks. ...

2012-06-15 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2012-0729 for claritincoupons.net html (10 KB)

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar Complainant has provided sufficient evidence of its rights in the CLARITIN Mark and, less relevant, of its rights in the CLARITIN Family of Marks. ...For all these reasons, the Panel concludes that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the CLARITIN Mark. Consequently, the requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied. ...

2012-06-07 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2013-0542 for electroluxjundiai.com html (10 KB)

Accordingly, the Complainant argues that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark ELECTROLUX. The Complainant argues that its trademark is famous, a fact that would have been confirmed by a number of previous decisions by Administrative Panels under the UDRP (for example, AB Electrolux v. ...Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has established to the Panel's satisfaction that it has rights in respect of the trademark ELECTROLUX. ...

2013-06-27 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2014-1316 for tysonfoods.org html (9 KB)

If, but only if, the Panel finds each and every one of the above-mentioned elements to be present, the Panel may order the cancellation of the registration or transfer of the disputed domain name to the Complainant. A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The registered trade mark mentioned in above is a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights. ...The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trade mark in which the Complainant has rights. Accordingly, the first element of the Policy is proved. ...

2014-10-14 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2014-1209 for amaegybank.com html (10 KB)

Complainant The Complainant argues that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its AMEGY BANK trademarks. The disputed domain name contains the AMEGY BANK trademark in its entirety with the addition of one single letter, “a.” ...Moreover, in accordance with paragraph 14(b) of the Rules, if a party, in the absence of exceptional circumstances, does not comply with any provision of, or requirement under, the Rules or any request from the Panel, the Panel shall draw such inferences therefrom, as it considers appropriate. A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has shown it owns trademark rights in the AMEGY BANK trademark. The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark AMEGY BANK. ...

2014-09-09 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2014-0511 for statoil-uk.com html (10 KB)

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has established to have rights to the STATOIL trademark. The disputed domain name, which combines the Complainant's STATOIL trademark with the suffix "uk", appears confusingly similar to the registered trademarks of the Complainant. ...Therefore, the Panel finds the disputed domain name to be confusingly similar to the trademark STATOIL in which the Complainant has rights. Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Complainant has satisfied paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy. ...

2014-05-22 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision DAU2014-0010 for verizon.net.au html (10 KB)

Complainant The Complainant submits that (i) the Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a name, trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; (ii) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Disputed Domain Name; and (iii) that the Disputed Domain Name has been registered or subsequently used in bad faith. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Panel finds that the Complainant's Marks constitute trade marks in which the Complainant has rights. ...

2014-06-05 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2015-2072 for buyklonopinsafe.com html (10 KB)

Complainant The Complainant submits that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark. It says that the Disputed Domain Name only differs from the Complainant's trademark by the addition of the non-distinctive elements "buy" and "safe". ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Panel accepts that the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant's trademark KLONOPIN in which it has rights. ...

2016-01-12 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-2281 for thevirginonline.com pdf (138 KB)

A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Panel is satisfied that the Complainant has rights over the VIRGIN trademark. “.com” as a technical requirement of generic Top-Level-Domain should be disregarded in the course of assessing the test of confusing similarity. ...The Panel finds that the mere addition of the indications “the” and “online” does not prevent a finding that the disputed domain name being confusingly similar to the Complainant’s VIRGIN trademark. The Panel concludes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s VIRGIN trademark and that paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied. ...

2022-08-19 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-2127 for masilly.com pdf (143 KB)

The Complainant’s trademark is almost entirely reproduced in the disputed domain name. A domain name is “identical or confusingly similar” to a trademark for the purposes of the Policy when the domain name includes the trademark, or a confusingly similar approximation, regardless of other terms in the domain name (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...Respondent 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar B. Rights or Legitimate Interests C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith 7. Decision...

2022-09-26 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-2249 for ferringreward.com pdf (141 KB)

Complainant The Complainant contends that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to its FERRING mark, that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name, and the Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith given that it was... ...Respondent 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar B. Rights or Legitimate Interests C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith 7. Decision...

2022-08-24 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-2303 for gb-kpmg.com pdf (140 KB)

Consequently, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark of the Complainant and that the Complainant has satisfied paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy. ...Factual Background 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar B. Rights or Legitimate Interests C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith 7. Decision...

2022-08-05 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-3694 for jupiterholdings.net pdf (140 KB)

Thus, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights in accordance with paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy. ...Respondent 6. Discussion and Findings A. Identical or Confusingly Similar B. Rights or Legitimate Interests C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith 7. Decision...

2022-12-27 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-4851 for qustudio.com pdf (226 KB)

Complainant The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the QUSTODIO trademark, that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name, and that the disputed domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar The Complainant has established rights in the QUSTODIO trademarks. The only differences between the QUSTODIO trademark and the disputed domain name is the substitution of the middle vowel “o” for the vowel “u”. ...

2023-02-17 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision DNL2023-0021 for monsantohollan.nl pdf (195 KB)

Complainant The Complainant makes the following contentions: i. The Disputed Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to the Trademark; ii. The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Disputed Domain Name; iii. ...Bedmond Maize Case No. DNL2023-0021 A. Identical or Confusingly Similar B. Rights or Legitimate Interests C. Registered or Used in Bad Faith...

2023-10-16 - Case Details