About Intellectual Property IP Training Respect for IP IP Outreach IP for... IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making IP Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization WIPO and Artificial Intelligence Working at WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets Future of IP WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars IP Enforcement WIPO ALERT Raising Awareness World IP Day WIPO Magazine Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Women Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Youth Examiners Innovation Ecosystems Economics Finance Intangible Assets Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism Music Fashion 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 World Intangible Investment Highlights 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 Webcast WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Tailored Initiatives & Projects Collaborative Forums & Dialogues Innovation, Creativity and Development Acceleration Program IP for Impact National IP Strategies Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program IP Commercialization WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Global Forum on IP and AI AI Infrastructure Interchange AI Tools & Services Staff Positions Affiliated Personnel Positions Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

Full Text Search on WIPO Panel Decisions

Found 62852   document(s)s (0.113 sec)

Rows

<<  <  45001 - 45020  >  >>

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2024-3396 for ibm-soft.com pdf (202 KB)

The Respondent is 丁洁 (ding jie), 上海骞行信息科技有限公司 (shang hai qian xing xin xi ke ji you xian gong si), China. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Alibaba Cloud Computing (Beijing) Co., Ltd. ...The disputed domain name consists of “ibm”, hyphen “-”, the term “soft”, and the generic Top- Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.com”. ...

2024-10-15 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-1999 for mozzila.com pdf (147 KB)

The Respondent is Lucjan Misiag, Poland. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Internet Domain Service BS Corp (the “Registrar”). 3. ...The Center verified that 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”). ...

2022-07-25 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-0296 for pokerstarssport.com html (15 KB)

The Respondent is Rick Sorentos, GoldDay Corporation, United States of America (“United States”). 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with PSI-USA, Inc. dba Domain Robot (the “Registrar”). 3. .../Knud Wallberg/ Knud Wallberg Sole Panelist Date: April 29, 2022 ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Flutter Entertainment plc and Rational Intellectual Holdings Limited v. Rick Sorentos, GoldDay Corporation Case No. D2022-0296 1. The Parties 2. The Domain Name and Registrar 3. ...

2022-03-29 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2016-1941 for frenchopen.chat html (17 KB)

The Respondent is Daniel Hall, dotCHAT, Inc. of Las Vegas, Nevada, United States of America (“United States”), self-represented. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name (the “Disputed Domain Name”) is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”). 3. ...The Respondent is not commonly known by the Disputed Domain Name. The website at the Disputed Domain Name features a Registrar parking page containing PPC links. ...

2016-12-12 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2024-3376 for yokohamaargentina.com, yokohamaaustralia.com, yokohamaaustria.com, yokohamabrasil.com, yokohamabulgaria.com, yokohamacanada.com, yokohamachile.com, yokohamadanmark.com, yokohamadeutschland.com, yokohamaeesti.com, yokohamafrance.com, yokohamagreece.com, yokohamahrvatska.com ... pdf (162 KB)

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. ...

2024-10-14 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2024-3192 for napawarranty.com pdf (166 KB)

The Respondent is Ralph Wood, United States. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”). 3. ...Foster Panelist Date: October 17, 2024 ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION National Automotive Parts Association LLC, Genuine Parts Company v. Ralph Wood Case No. D2024-3192 1. The Parties 2. The Domain Name and Registrar 3. Procedural History 4. ...

2024-10-21 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2005-0705 for eccomplia.com html (17 KB)

The Respondent is Renars Jeromans, Riga, Latvia.   2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Go Daddy Software.   3. ...ii) Use in bad faith For the Complainant to succeed, he also has to prove that the Respondent is using the domain name in bad faith. The administrative panel in Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows, WIPO Case No. ...

2005-09-23 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2019-2292 for electroluxshope.com html (18 KB)

The disputed domain name was registered in bad faith. It has to be noted that the Complainant’s trademark registrations predate the registration of the disputed domain name. ...Since the Respondent’s name is not similar to, or otherwise related to, the disputed domain name, and the Respondent has provided no background to explain why the Respondent registered the disputed domain name, the Panel finds that the Respondent has not been commonly known by the disputed domain name. ...

2019-11-25 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2024-3480 for simonpremiumoutlets.shop pdf (203 KB)

The Respondent is 深圳葛里法科技有限公司(shen zhen ge li fa ke ji you xian gong si), China. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Alibaba Cloud Computing Ltd. ...The only other difference between the disputed domain name and the Complainant’s trademark is the addition of the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.shop” to the disputed domain name. ...

2024-11-01 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2023-0417 for at-infiineon.com, at-infineon.com, at-infineon.net, infineon-at.com, infineon-at.net pdf (59 KB)

The disputed domain name is registered with Amazon Registrar, Inc. (the “Registrar”). The disputed domain names and are registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...This test typically involves a side-by-side comparison of the disputed domain name and the textual components of the relevant trademark to assess whether the mark is recognizable within the disputed domain name. ...

2023-04-03 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2025-3117 for instasave.world pdf (153 KB)

The Respondent is vinod Sinwar, India, self-represented. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Hostinger Operations, UAB (the “Registrar”). 3. ...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”). ...

2025-09-19 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2025-4286 for albionsaddlemakers.com pdf (146 KB)

The Respondent is dahui yang, Hong Kong, China. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Dynadot Inc (the “Registrar”). 3. ...In addition, the disputed domain name is identical to the Complainant’s domain name , apart from the gTLD. ...

2025-12-24 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2025-0529 for alstominfo.com pdf (142 KB)

The Respondent is arshi agro, India. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”). 3. ...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”). ...

2025-04-08 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2026-0553 for targetdartseu.shop pdf (144 KB)

The Respondent is li bai, China. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with NameCheap, Inc. ...The Center verif ied that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisf ied 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”). ...

2026-04-08 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2026-3538 for en-amica.com pdf (147 KB)

The Respondent is Enrico Martinelli, Italy. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Register SPA (the “Registrar”). 3. ...The entirety of the AMICA mark is reproduced within the disputed domain name, combined with the element “en-”. The Panel therefore finds the mark is recognizable within the disputed domain name. ...

2026-10-12 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2026-2060 for runemate.com pdf (147 KB)

Respondent is gao jian hua, China, represented by Cornerstone Law Firm, United States of America (“USA”). 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Bizcn.com, Inc. ...Decision For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name be transferred to Complainant. /Yijun Tian/ Yijun Tian Sole Panelist Date: September 16, 2026 https://www.wipo.int/en/web/amc/domain-name-disputes/overview/index ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Jagex Limited v. gao jian hua Case No. ...

2026-09-22 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2026-3361 for monster-energy.blog pdf (147 KB)

The Respondent is Pamela Espinosa, Ecuador. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Automattic Inc. ...Redondo Aguilera Sole Panelist Date: September 14, 2026 https://www.wipo.int/en/web/amc/domain-name-disputes/overview/index ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Monster Energy Company v. Pamela Espinosa Case No. ...

2026-09-24 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2024-1692 for logincoldwellbanker.com pdf (145 KB)

The Respondent is DNS Admin, Buntai LTD, Switzerland. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name is registered with Key-Systems GmbH (the “Registrar”). 3. ...In addition, the Complainant uses the domain name as its official domain name and also owns the domain name The disputed domain name was registered on October 19, 2022. ...

2024-07-11 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2015-0180 for dhlecommerce.com html (17 KB)

The Respondent also states that said name was selected over one year before the registration of the disputed domain name, made in December 2010, and that the disputed domain name as well as another domain name, , were registered since the Respondent decided to release a software “under the DHL commerce brand”. ...See, amongst others, the leading case Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmellows, WIPO Case No. D2000-0003. In the present case, as mentioned above, the Respondent has failed to submit convincing evidence to substantiate its claims for a legitimate interest in the disputed domain name. ...

2015-04-16 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2011-1446 for yourmediq.com html (10 KB)

There is no evidence that the Respondent has been commonly known by the disputed domain name, or a similar name. There is no evidence that the Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name is noncommercial or otherwise fair. ...According to the evidence the Complainant sent cease and desist letters to the Respondent on May 23, 2011 and June 17, 2011, which were not replied to, and in the interim the registration of the disputed domain name was renewed. The Panel finds the Respondent’s actions to be an aggravating factor in bad faith (Ebay Inc. v. ...

2011-10-17 - Case Details