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”).
...Respondent
The Respondent is located in China.
C. The Disputed Domain Name
The disputed domain name was registered on February 27, 2023.
The disputed domain name was registered on December 6, 2022.
...
2023-09-29 - Case Details
Respondent is WhoisGuard Protected, WhoisGuard, Inc., Panama / Domain Accounts, 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 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”).
...
2020-08-26 - Case Details
The Respondent is Owen Jones of Phichai, Uttaradit, Thailand.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name, (the “Domain Name”), is registered with Wild West Domains, Inc. ...This is not a bona fide use of the Domain Name.
The Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the Domain Name.
...
2011-05-17 - Case Details
The Respondent is he jxing, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Dynadot Inc (the “Registrar”).
3. ...https://www.wipo.int/en/web/amc/domain-name-disputes/overview/index
https://www.wipo.int/en/web/amc/domain-name-disputes/overview/index
https://www.wipo.int/en/web/amc/domain-name-disputes/overview/index
https://www.wipo.int/en/web/amc/domain-name-disputes/overview/index
https://www.wipo.int/en/web/amc/domain-name-disputes/overview/index
page 6
7. ...
2026-10-20 - Case Details
The Respondent is Home Retail Group / Rafique Holding, both of London, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC. ...Complainant
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trade mark in which it owns rights; that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name; and that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2013-02-08 - 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 also asserts that the Respondent is not well known under the disputed domain name and the disputed domain name clearly refers to the services of the Complainant. Consequently, the Complainant concludes that the Respondent cannot claim, in good faith, to have any legitimate interest in the disputed domain name.
...
2018-05-11 - Case Details
The Respondent is chioma john, jan trading, Malaysia.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameSilo, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Moreover, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in
bad faith. The Complainant submits that the Ifchor Galbraiths name is well-known in the shipbroking
industry, that its registered rights predate the registration of the disputed domain name by approximately
two years, and that there is no plausible explanation for the registration of the disputed domain name other
than to target the Complainant’s mark, particularly given that the disputed domain name replicates the
Complainant’s principal domain name in its entirety by merely substituting the
“.com” generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) with the “.cc” ccTLD. ...
2026-06-15 - Case Details
The Respondent is Jennifer Lawson of Kemah, Texas, United States of America.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The Disputed Domain Name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”). ...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”).
...
2017-11-02 - Case Details
The Respondent is Timur Dzadzamiya, Ukraine.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name (the “Domain Name”) is registered with the Registrar of Domain Names REG.RU LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...Finally, the Respondent’s January 14, 2021 offer to sell the Domain Name also indicates that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name.
...
2021-04-14 - Case Details
The Respondent is DYNAPAR.COM c/o Whois IDentity Shield, Vancouver, Canada.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Nameview Inc.
3. ...In particular, in the terms of paragraph 4(c) of the Policy, there is nothing to suggest that the Respondent may have used the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or been commonly known by the domain name; or made a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name. ...
2007-01-19 - Case Details
The Respondent is Lombardo Fausto of Castrovillari, Italy.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name, (the “Domain Name”), is registered with OVH (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”).
...
2017-07-04 - 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”).
...Rights or Legitimate Interests
The second element of a claim of abusive domain name registration and use is that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name (Policy, paragraph 4(a)(ii)). ...
2016-11-07 - 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”).
...It does not appear that the Domain Name has ever resolved to an active website.
Complainant asserts that it has never authorized or licensed Respondents to use the HEMLOCK FARMS
trademark in a domain name or otherwise. ...
2023-06-27 - Case Details
Der Gesuchsgegner ist Markus Huber, Sound Vision House AG aus Fahrwangen, Schweiz.
2. Streitiger Domain-Name
Gegenstand des Verfahrens ist der Domain-Name (nachfolgend der „Domain-Name”).
...Diese sei 2002 gegründet worden. In der Gründungsphase sei der Domain-Name durch Markus Huber privat registriert worden, da die Firma noch nicht gegründet war. Nach erfolgter Firmengründung der Tonbild Spinnerei AG, mit Herrn Huber als Gründungsmitglied, sei vergessen worden, der Domain-Name auf die Firma zu übertragen. ...
2014-02-07 - Case Details
The Respondent is Jérôme Haegeli, Lajoux, Switzerland.
2. The Domain Name
The dispute concerns the domain name (the “Domain Name”).
3. Procedural History
The request was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) by email on June 27, 2005, and in hardcopy on June 29, 2005.
...In the light of the foregoing, Respondent’s acts do not show any bad
faith and his use of the Domain Name therefore appears not to be unjustified
(unbefugt) with regard to the personal name right, nor unfair if one
would apply the Unfair Competition Act (what would not be appropriate as set
out above) (see WIPO decision DCH2004-00016,
Tourismusverein Lenzerheide – Valbella v. ...
2005-10-03 - Case Details
Complainant
Complainant contends that:
- the domain name is identical to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
- the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
- the Domain Names were registered and are being used in bad faith; and
- the domain name should be transferred to the Complainant; and
- the domain names and should be cancelled.
...Domain Name Registered and Used in Bad Faith: Policy 4(a)(iii)
The third element to be established by Complainant is that the Domain Name has been registered and used in bad faith.
...
2001-06-14 - Case Details
page 2
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.
...
2026-08-03 - Case Details
The Respondent is represented by Gervaise Davis III, Esq. of Davis & Schroeder, PC, of 215 W Franklin Street, 4th Floor, PO Box 3080, Monterey, California 93940-3080, USA.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The domain name in dispute is . The Registrar is Melbourne IT Limited. ...The Respondent submits inter alia:
(a) That it and its predecessor Mailbank have been using the domain name legitimately in its vanity email business since July 12, 1996.
(b) That the domain name was registered for the purpose of subscribers to its shared domain name business.
...
2001-10-18 - Case Details
Instead of offering the disputed domain name for sale, the Respondent used the disputed domain name as a parking and/or landing page featuring pay-per-click links. ...The Respondent did not deny that the content behind the disputed domain name was changed to a parking page and that the disputed domain name is currently inactive. The Respondent stated that the disputed domain name was not used for commercial purposes, as the Respondent claimed that he is a hobbyist who collects domain names.
...
2015-12-28 - Case Details
The Respondent is Piao Ying of Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with HiChina Zhicheng Technology Ltd. ...Respondent
The Respondent is an individual based in China.
C. The Disputed Domain Name
The disputed domain name was registered on November 4, 2014.
D. The Website at the Disputed Domain Name
The website at the disputed domain name (the “Website”) previously promoted the business and products of Shenzhen Punghan Yuying Industry Co. ...
2015-03-06 - Case Details