His main arguments are that the registration agreement for the disputed domain name is in Chinese, and the Respondent is Chinese and speaks only simple English and could not understand the Complaint without using Google Translate.
Paragraph 10(b) and (c) of the Rules require the Panel to ensure that the Parties are treated with equality, that each Party is given a fair opportunity to present its case and that the administrative proceeding take place with due expedition. ...
2020-09-03 - Case Details
There are numerous guides for removing the Complainant’s spyware, which was described as detecting Google and Yahoo searches and redirecting them to the Complainant’s site. The Complainant is also a cybersquatter and, the Complainant’s principal has been involved in various other domain name disputes. ...
2020-07-21 - Case Details
The Panel notes Respondent’s contention of performing a “basic due diligence”, but finds it very unlikely that Respondent would not have made a customary Internet search of the term “aoga” (which would have likely shown Complainant’s online presence). In this regard, Complainant provided a Google search of “aoga” showing Complainant’s information in the top results. Even if Complainant’s search is dated 2022, the Panel notes Complainant’s longstanding use of AOGA, and noting Respondent’s acquisition of the Domain Name took place in 2020, the Panel is ready to infer that a similar search at the time of the acquisition would have shown some information about Complainant. ...
2022-02-15 - Case Details
There does not appear to be a Charleston in the Caymans according to a Google Maps search....
2020-11-20 - Case Details
The Complainant has accounts under NIPPON INDIA MUTUAL FUND on popular social media platforms and mobile apps on Google Playstore and App Store with over 500,000 installations.
The Complainant is the registered proprietor of the trade mark RELIANCE NIPPON LIFE ASSET MANAGEMENT under Indian Registration No. 3599328 dated July 26, 2017. ...
2021-01-14 - Case Details
The Complainant states that an Internet user usually types “vfs”, “vfs help”, “vfs support” or “vfsvisa” etc. or put these words as search strings in search engines like Google / Yahoo etc. In such an event, the Complainant contends that Internet users might be taken to the Respondent’s web site which is not authorized to provide any information on visa related services by any of the diplomatic missions or the Government of any country which undoubtedly leads to deception and confusion amongst such users.
...
2020-11-04 - Case Details
The Respondent also says the level of sales of the Complainant’s products is small compared to other products and Google Analytics data shows that the Complainant’s Link Engine Management products do not show up in the top results for traffic to the Respondent’s website.
...
2020-11-13 - Case Details
The Oki-data factors require that:
(i) the respondent must actually be offering goods or services related to the trademark in respect of which the domain name is confusingly similar;
(ii) the respondent must offer only those goods or services in connection with the disputed domain name;
(iii) the respondent must have disclosed its true relationship with the owner of the trademark to which the domain name is identical or confusingly similar, prior to notice of the dispute; and,
(iv) the respondent must not have attempted to “corner the market” in domain names that reflect that trademark.
The Panel notes that the panelist in Google Inc. v. Q Interactive Pty Ltd / Mr. Victor Quinteros,
WIPO Case No. DAU2012-0026, proposed an alternative approach of “descriptive fair use” in cases where the respondent was providing services which were interoperable with the trade mark owner’s products and services. ...
2020-12-24 - Case Details
The Complainant’s official website is located at the domain name , registered in 2002, as well as through Facebook and Twitter, and operates mobile applications available at the Apple App Store and Google Play.
The disputed domain name was registered on December 10, 2017 by the Respondent “Richard Hash”. ...
2020-12-21 - Case Details
El Experto dentro de los poderes generales articulados inter alia en el párrafo 10 del Reglamento, ha consultado la página web corporativa de la Demandante “www.floristeriasbedunia.com”, así como la página web del Tanatorio San Carlos de Salamanca “www.tanatoriosancarlos.es” y ha efectuado una búsqueda en el buscador de Google respecto a la denominación “floristería tanatorio Salamanca”.
El Experto no ha podido, por tanto, encontrar ninguna referencia, ni obra en el expediente ninguna evidencia, que permita constatar si el referido nombre comercial FLORISTERIA TANATORIO SALAMANCA, es o no utilizado también a título de marca para identificar los productos y servicios de la Demandante. ...
2021-08-18 - Case Details
A basic search in an Internet search engine such as Google would have revealed that FINWISE was a trademark of the Complainant. The Respondent apparently failed to take the precaution of conducting such a search; at the same time he acknowledged in correspondence with the Complainant that the brand was known in its sector. ...
2021-01-25 - Case Details
The Complaint also includes emails sent by Equitas Global personnel to some of these directors and officers warning them that it was also going to begin taking out Google ads promoting their, and Dairy Farm Group’s, alleged practices. There is evidence that these ads are in fact being published if someone were to search on the executive’s name.
5. ...
2021-03-29 - Case Details
The term “coradia” is quite singular and original since it is a word of pure invention that has no meaning of its own, other than to designate the railway rolling stock developed, marketed and built by the Complainant, as may be confirmed by “Google” searches.
A previous case under the Policy has found that the Complainant’s said mark is widely known and does not have any meaning in commerce other than to refer to the Complainant’s trademarks. ...
2021-03-10 - Case Details
The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Google LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. Procedural History
The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on December 17, 2020. ...
2021-03-19 - Case Details
The Complainant also began to find that customers confused its restaurants with the Respondent’s restaurants in Google Reviews.
Consequently, the Complainant initiated the present UDRP proceeding against the Respondent concerning the Domain Name and also a separate proceeding concerning the domain name . ...
2021-12-27 - Case Details
The Respondent does not dispute that the Complainant has established a reputation since 2009 in its particular field but observes that there are many other companies using “Luma” as a company or brand name and denies ever hearing of the Complainant before this proceeding. The Respondent points to more than 26 million Google search results for “luma” and 160 pending and registered LUMA or LUMA-formative trademarks in the United States alone. ...
2022-01-10 - Case Details
The registrant, as revealed by the information provided by the
Registrar to the Center, is reported to be Alex Will with a mailing address purportedly in the U.S. The
Complainants note that, according to Google Maps, the street, town and zip code point to a different area;
f) the information provided by the registrants of the disputed domain names is intended to mask the true
identity of the Respondents in circumstances in which the Complainants have reasonable grounds to believe
that the disputed domain names are subject to common control by the same party;
g) the first ten domain names were registered in two tranches, on October 14, 2024, and December 5, 2024,
with each tranche of domain name registrations providing identical details and with all but one disputed
domain name using the same registrar;
h) the websites corresponding to the disputed domain names , ,
, , , and
, when active, were identical;
i) the disputed domain name was registered using a different Registrar (PDR Ltd d/b/a
PublicDomainRegistry.com), but it was registered on October 14, 2024 like the disputed domain names , , , and and
used for a contact email address which was displayed on the websites to which seven of the disputed
domain names previously resolved (“[…]@the-blueprism.cc”);
j) according to the Registrar-disclosed registrant information, eleven of the disputed domain names are
registered with email addresses based on the domain name <21cn.com>;
k) as outlined above, all four Respondents have non-existent or inaccurate mailing addresses with a pattern
emerging amongst “Ms. ...
2025-07-10 - Case Details
Respondent states the content
on the Domain Name’s website is corroborated by independent reviews from state departments of education
in both Minnesota and Colorado, which have allegedly concluded certain materials of Complainant are
“not recommended”. Respondent provided a link to a Google document that contains her complaint and
purports to reference these state reviews.
Respondent further states that American Public Media (APM) Reports has done reporting on the topic of
early reading instruction, finding certain types of instructional methods harmful. ...
2025-10-23 - Case Details
The Complainant provides multiple search engine queries f rom the Google and Bing
search engines on terms such as “uniservice unisafe” (not searched as a phrase), “uniservicemarine”, and
“uniservice marine” (searched as a phrase), all taken on August 13, 2025, each of which shows the
Complainant as the top item in the search results.
...
2025-09-16 - Case Details
There does not appear to be a notice of trademark registration on Respondent’s website,
and it seems reasonable for the Panel to presume that if Respondent had conducted a Google search of
MEDIA GIANT at the time it purchased the disputed domain name at auction this might not have advised
Respondent regarding Complainant’s trademark rights.
...
2025-09-29 - Case Details