The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “irDRP”), the Rules for .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for .ir Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to its WAGO trademark. It states that the disputed domain name fully incorporates its trademark and that the addition of the geographical indicator “.ir”, denoting the Islamic Republic of Iran, is not effective to distinguish the disputed domain name from that mark. ...
2017-11-30 - Case Details
The Respondent is Paul Level, Ukraine.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Spaceship, Inc. ...Leppink
Sole Panelist
Date: March 18, 2025
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Corning Incorporated v. Paul Level
Case No. D2025-0491
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
3. Procedural History
4. ...
2025-03-20 - Case Details
The Respondent is Che Hei Isaac Cheung, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with CloudFlare, Inc.
...The entirety of the mark is reproduced within the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the disputed domain
name is confusingly similar to the mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2025-02-13 - Case Details
The Respondent is wei wei, Hong Kong, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Gname.com Pte. ...The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the
disputed domain name. The disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
The Complainant requested that the disputed domain name be transferred to the Complainant.
...
2025-02-10 - Case Details
The Respondent is Jack Arthur, United Kingdom.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a
PublicDomainRegistry.com (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The entirety of the Complainant’s mark is reproduced within the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the
disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2025-12-15 - Case Details
The Respondent is Alex Hofmann, Germany.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...The Respondent has used
the disputed domain name to deceive consumers and investors about Respondent’s identity because the
website associated with the disputed domain name is a clone of the website of a Complainant's affiliated
company available at the domain name .
...
2024-11-04 - Case Details
The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Ascio Technologies Inc. ...Registered and Used in Bad Faith
As stated in many decisions rendered under the Policy (e.g., Robert Ellenbogen v. Mike Pearson,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0001) both conditions, registration and used in bad faith, must be demonstrated; consequently, the Complainant must show that:
- the disputed domain name was registered by the Respondent in bad faith, and
- the disputed domain name is being used by the Respondent in bad faith.
...
2021-01-06 - Case Details
Respondents are Amartya Sinha, Global Webs Link (“Respondent No. 1”) and Novartis RO, India (“Respondent No. 2”).
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Numerous UDRP panels have recognized that incorporating a trademark in its entirety can be sufficient to establish that the disputed domain name is at least confusingly similar to a registered trademark (see e.g. PepsiCo, Inc. v. PEPSI, SRL (a/k/a P.E.P.S.I.) and EMS Computer Industry (a/k/a EMS),
WIPO Case No. ...
2021-03-22 - Case Details
The Respondent is Abuzer kadayif, Turkey.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name, (the “Domain Name”), is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Domain Name comprises the name “iqos”, followed by “dua3” and the “.com” generic Top-Level Domain identifier.
...
2021-10-13 - Case Details
Respondent is ofir klein, United States, self-represented.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal
requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...
2024-01-22 - Case Details
The Domain Name and Registrar
2.1 The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...There is also no evidence before the Panel to the contrary.
6.9 There is no right or legitimate interest in holding a domain name for such a purpose and the use of a domain name in this manner is use in bad faith (see for example, Vestey Group Limited v. ...
2019-04-18 - Case Details
The Respondent is Steve Ryan, Florida Chem, United States.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with SRS AB (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The entirety of the BECHTEL mark is reproduced within the disputed domain name. Accordingly, the
disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the mark for the purposes of the Policy. ...
2024-11-25 - Case Details
The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to the Complaint satisfied the formal
requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...The Complainant requests the consolidation of the Complaint against
the multiple disputed domain name registrants pursuant to paragraph 10(e) of the Rules.
The disputed domain name registrants did not comment on the Complainant’s request.
...
2024-05-21 - Case Details
The Respondent is Domain Manager, United States of America (“United States”).
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
GOPA - Gesellschaft für Organisation Planung und Ausbildung mbH v. Domain Manager
Case No. D2025-0062
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
3. Procedural History...
2025-02-17 - Case Details
The Respondent is VMI INC, Cayman Islands, United Kingdom.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (“the Disputed Domain Name”) is registered with
GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Da Cunha Ferreira
Sole Panelist
Date: March 12, 2025
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Thales Group v. VMI INC
Case No. D2025-0297
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
3. Procedural History
4. ...
2025-03-14 - Case Details
The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal
requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for
page 2
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...UDRP panels have consistently held that in cases where a domain
name incorporates the entirety of a trademark, or where at least a dominant feature of the relevant mark is
recognizable in the domain name, the domain name will normally be considered confusingly similar to that
mark for purposes of UDRP standing. ...
2023-09-29 - Case Details
The Respondent is F1 Help Limited, Kingsley Court, Lincoln Fields, Lincoln, Lincolnshire, United Kingdom, represented by Loven Patents & Trade Marks, United Kingdom.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Tucows.
3. ...The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...
2008-02-19 - Case Details
The Respondent is Robert Tansey, with address in Roanoke, Texas, USA.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is .
The registrar of the disputed domain name is Register.com, Inc., with business
address in New York, New York, USA.
3. ...In a
period of more than a year between the registration of the disputed domain name
and the initiation of this proceeding, Respondent posted no content on a website
identified by the disputed domain name, and cannot be said to be "making"
use of the domain name. ...
2001-09-25 - Case Details
The Respondent is Gilberta M Iorg, United States.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to the Complaint satisfied the formal
requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...
2023-12-26 - Case Details
The Complainant states that it has not authorised the Respondent to use the disputed domain name. Nor is the Respondent affiliated with it. The disputed domain name is plainly not derived from the Respondent’s name. ...Burn World-Wide, Ltd. d/b/a BGT Partners v. Banta Global Turnkey Ltd
WIPO Case No. D2010-0470.
Generally speaking, a finding that a domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith requires an inference to be drawn that the respondent in question has registered and is using the disputed domain name to take advantage of its significance as a trademark owned by (usually) the complainant.
...
2019-07-17 - Case Details