In the absence of any license or permission from Complainant to use its widely-known trademark, no bona fide or legitimate use of the domain name could reasonably be claimed (LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master,
WIPO Case No. ...
2011-07-04 - Case Details
Incorporation of the BELSTAFF mark in the Domain Names without any reasonable justification is sufficient evidence of bad faith by the Respondent under the circumstances. See LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494; Caixa D’Estalvis I Pensions de Barcelona (“La Caixa”) v. ...
2012-07-06 - Case Details
Registered and Used in Bad Faith
Previous UDRP panels have found that where a domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark its very use by someone with no connection to the trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith. LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494, Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains LLC.,
WIPO Case No. ...
2014-02-21 - Case Details
Previous UDRP panels have found that where a domain name is so obviously connected with a well-known trademark its very use by someone with no connection to the trademark suggests opportunistic bad faith. LEGO Juris A/S v. Reiner Stotte,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0494, Sanofi-Aventis v. Nevis Domains LLC.
WIPO Case No. ...
2013-12-17 - Case Details
In the absence of any license or permission from the Complainant to use their
trademarks, the composition of the disputed domain name, and the fact that the disputed domain name
resolves to a website that uses the Complainant’s trademarks and contains PPC links to competing banking
services, no actual or contemplated bona fide or legitimate use of the disputed domain name could
reasonably be claimed (see, e.g., Sportswear Company S.P.A. v. Tang Hong, WIPO Case No. D2014-1875;
and LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd,
Host master, WIPO Case No. ...
2024-04-29 - Case Details
The Panel takes this as evidence of Respondent’s bad faith. LEGO Juris A/S v. Ammar
Briouel / Brahim Mahjoubi, WIPO Case No. D2019-0750 (involving website suspension following a takedown
request by Complainant).
...
2024-04-15 - Case Details
参见 Mastercard International Inc.诉 Better, Deals; Finestnames.com，WIPO 案件编号
D2009-0702；Dunkin’ Donuts Incorporated and Dunkin’ Donuts USA, Inc.诉 Dazzledesigns，WIPO 案件编
号 D2004-0436；LEGO Juris A/S 诉 bangfei jiang，WIPO 案件编号 D2012-1235。因此，被投诉人曾经将争
议域名用于含有成人内容的网站的这一行为构成恶意，且专家组认为被投诉人的这一行为损害了投诉人商标的
声誉，破坏了投诉人正常的业务活动。
...
2024-01-09 - Case Details
In addition, the Panel finds, similarly to other UDRP panels, that the addition of the gTLD “.online” to the
Disputed Domain Name does not constitute an element as to avoid confusing similarity for the purposes of
the Policy (see, e.g., LEGO Juris A/S v. Nguyen Xuan Hau, WIPO Case No. D2023-4439; Philip Morris
Products S.A. v. Маханьков Михаил Владимирович / Makhankov Mikhail, WIPO Case No. ...
2024-03-12 - Case Details
杨智超) Yang Zhi Chao, WIPO Case No.
D2023-3983 and Lego Juris A/S v. Yang Zhi Chao (杨智超), WIPO Case No. D2023-0056. Such use
constitutes evidence of bad faith registration and use as contemplated under paragraph 4(b)(ii) of the Policy.
...
2024-03-11 - Case Details
Banijay Group has built many long-running shows, such as Big Brother, MasterChef, Survivor, Lego Masters,
Touche pas à mon Poste, Who wants to be a millionaire or Don’t forget the Lyrics.
The Complainants’ business has 4,650 employees worldwide and their 2023 revenue was EUR 4,318
million.
...
2024-12-13 - Case Details
The Panel also finds applicable to this case the position on the use of English as the fairest neutral
language, stated by previous UDRP panels under similar scenarios (see LEGO Juris A/S v. Asiagroup,
WIPO Case No. D2022-2829, IPSOS v. Beats, WIPO Case No. D2022-1055).
...
2024-08-16 - Case Details
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/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2005/d2005-0740.html
page 6
Panels have previously held that a finding of bad faith can be established where a complainant’s trademark
is shown to be well-known or in wide use at the time of registration of the disputed domain name (see LEGO
Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No. D2013-0091). The Respondent must have been fully aware of the
Complainant and the Complainant’s Trademark when it registered the Disputed Domain Name, given the
well-known nature of the Complainant’s brand, evidenced by the various trademark registrations for the
Complainant’s Trademark across the globe that was put into use well before the Respondent registered the
Disputed Domain Name. ...
2024-09-26 - Case Details
The Panel
takes this as corroborating evidence of Respondent’s bad faith. LEGO Juris A/S v. Ammar Briouel / Brahim
Mahjoubi, WIPO Case No. D2019-0750 (involving website suspension following a takedown request by
Complainant).
...
2022-09-05 - Case Details
D2014-1875, Sportswear Company S.PA. v. Tang Hong; WIPO Case No. D2010-0138, LEGO Juris A/S v.
DomainPark Ltd, David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master).
...
2022-08-11 - Case Details
Miami Investment Brokers Inc, WIPO Case No. D2012-1213); LEGO
Juris A/S v. Registration Private, Domains By Proxy, LLC / Carolina Rodrigues, Fundacion Comercio
Electronico, WIPO Case No. ...
2022-05-24 - Case Details
Previous UDRP panels have regularly ruled that bad faith was found where a domain name is so obviously
connected with a well-known trademark that its use by someone, with no connection to the trademark,
suggests opportunistic bad faith. See LEGO Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No. D2013-0091 and
Carrefour v. Jean-Claude Bot / Albert Pierre, WIPO Case No. ...
2023-11-09 - Case Details
Prior
panels have held that bad faith can be found where a domain name is so obviously connected with a
well-known trademark that its very use by someone with no connection to the trademarks suggests
opportunistic bad faith (see LEGO Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No. D2013-0091). Given the
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2009/d2009-0320.html
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2009/d2009-0113.html
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?...
2022-10-18 - Case Details
These allegations make out a prima facie case that Respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in the
disputed domain name, which Respondent has not rebutted. See, e.g., LEGO Juris A/S v. DomainPark Ltd,
David Smith, Above.com Domain Privacy, Transure Enterprise Ltd, Host master, WIPO Case No.
...
2022-11-25 - Case Details
Previous panels have consistently found that the mere registration of a domain name that is identical or
confusingly similar to a famous trademark can create a presumption of bad faith registration. WIPO
Overview 3.0, section 3.1.4; LEGO Juris A/S v. Aamir Abdul Wahid, Spiro Line Media, supra, WIPO Case
No. D2019-0245; Facebook Inc. v. te5gfh gtfghbfh, supra. ...
2022-11-23 - Case Details
Prior UDRP panels have held that bad faith can be found where a domain name is so obviously
connected with a well-known trademark that its very use by someone with no connection to the
trademarks suggests opportunistic bad faith (see LEGO Juris A/S v. store24hour, WIPO Case No.
D2013-0091). Given the strong reputation of the Complainant’s trademark, registration in bad faith
can be inferred in this case.
...
2022-11-22 - Case Details