The Respondent is Zhi Huang of People’s Republic of China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain names and are registered with GoDaddy.com, Inc.
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”).
...
2010-10-18 - Case Details
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”).
...The Respondent enquired as to whether the Complainant would be interested in purchasing or renting the said domain name or “for us to set up an affiliate site to sell Halifax bank products on it”. In later correspondence, the Respondent also mentioned the disputed domain name as available for sale along with another domain name . ...
2016-03-01 - Case Details
The Complainant’s case is that the domain name was held by Mr. Kelly on trust for the Complainant and, accordingly, the Complainant became the beneficial owner of the domain name. ...The “Building Supplies R’Us” trademark
4.A.5 The Complainant asserts common law trade mark rights in the name and mark “Building Supplies R’Us”, In addition to the disputed domain name and the domain name registered by Mr. ...
2008-06-05 - Case Details
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”).
...It is well-established in prior decisions under the Policy that the offer of sale of a disputed domain name to a complainant for an amount greatly in excess of the cost of its registration constitutes use of the disputed domain name in bad faith. ...
2018-04-16 - Case Details
The Respondent is Evgeniy Pechenkin, Russian Federation.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with REG.RU LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The disputed domain name is identical to the AWAY TRAVEL trademark and to the Complainant’s domain name . ...
2019-10-31 - Case Details
The Respondent is Whoisguard Protected, Whoisguard, Inc of Panama, Panama / Z-P. M of Vernon, France.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with eNom (the "Registrar").
3. ...The disputed domain name itself is confusingly similar to the VOLCANO trademark of the Complainant, which was registered and used long before the registration of the disputed domain name. ...
2015-04-21 - Case Details
Applicable Rules
Paragraph 4 (a) of the Policy directs that Complainant must prove each of the following:
(i) the domain name in issue is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant's trademark, and
(ii) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect of the domain name, and
(iii) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...This use does not create a right or legitimate interest in the domain names at issue. Any interest in acquiring income by renting or selling a domain name is not legitimate when the domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark, and the Registrant intends to sell it to the trademark holder, as is the case here. ...
2002-01-31 - Case Details
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”).
...Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy provides that in order to divest a respondent of a disputed domain name, a complainant must demonstrate each of the following:
(i) the 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 interests in respect of the domain name; and
(iii) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2013-08-19 - Case Details
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”).
...The Panel also concludes that the Domain Names are confusingly similar to Complainant’s KG-175 and KG‑175D marks. The lack of hyphens in the Domain Names are of negligible importance, and the term “wiki” in the third Domain Name does not overcome the fact that the KG-175 mark is still recognizable within the Domain Names.
...
2020-01-17 - 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
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.
Paragraph 3(c) of the Rules states that a complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that
the domain names are registered by the same domain name holder.
...
2024-01-18 - Case Details
The Respondent is Liu Guohong of Tianjin, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with HiChina Zhicheng Technology Ltd. ...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”).
...
2013-12-11 - Case Details
The Respondent is 汪秀琳, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with 浙江贰贰网络有限公司 (the “Registrar”).
3. ...The Respondent is not using the disputed domain name for personal noncommercial interests.
The registration of a domain name incorporating another’s famous mark proves that the Respondent knows the Complainant well and therefore registered the disputed domain name in bad faith. ...
2021-07-16 - Case Details
Respondent is Oskar Zajączkowski, Poland.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with OVH (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Discussion and Findings
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy lists the three elements which Complainant must satisfy with respect to the
Domain Name:
(i) the Domain Name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which
Complainant has rights; 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.
...
2024-05-30 - Case Details
Rights or Legitimate Interests in Respect of the Domain Name
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy enumerates how a Respondent may establish rights to and legitimate interests in a domain name. ...The evidence indicates that at the time Respondent registered the domain name, he was aware that the Complainant had an interest in the domain name. Additional evidence also shows that Respondent was looking to make money through his registration of the domain name at the expense of the NCAA. ...
2000-11-12 - Case Details
The Respondent is Jeff Park, Republic of Korea.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Korea Information Certificate Authority Inc. d/b/a DomainCa.com.
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”).
...
2009-07-14 - Case Details
Respondent is Fundacion Private Whois of Panama, Panama.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Internet.bs Corp. ...Complainant further suggests that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name because (1) Complainant has registered its domain name many years before the registration of the disputed domain name took place and there are no reasons apparent to Complainant why Respondent should have legitimate rights in an almost exact domain name, (2) Respondent is using the disputed domain name on the Internet in a way so similar to how Complainant is using its domain name that it becomes obvious that Respondent is not making use of the disputed domain name in a bona fide manner and (3) Respondent apparently wishes to generate “hits” on the website at “www.raiffeisench.com”, thus is using the domain name for a non-legitimate commercial purpose in order to attract and confuse Internet users.
...
2012-11-27 - Case Details
The Respondent is danDan Wu, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Gname.com Pte. ...Further, the Registrar has confirmed that the Respondent’s name is “danDan Wu”, which does not resemble
the disputed domain name. Nothing in the record indicates that the Respondent is commonly known by the
disputed domain name.
...
2024-02-19 - Case Details
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”).
...The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The Respondent has not been granted any license or other authorization to use the Complainant’s trademark rights in the disputed domain name. ...
2016-03-02 - Case Details
The Complainant claims that because the Respondent offered to sell the domain name to the Complainant for a value in excess of any out of pocket costs directly related to the domain name, he has registered the domain names in bad faith.
The Complainant also says that not only did the Respondent offer to sell the domain name , but that he also registered the domain names and as soon as the Complainant mentioned its interest in the domain name .
...
2001-03-15 - 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”).
...Further, paragraph 3(c) of the UDRP Rules provides that a complaint may relate to more than one domain name, provided that the domain names are registered by the same domain name holder.
In the present case, there are four disputed domain names, and apparently two Respondents. ...
2021-04-30 - Case Details