Respondent’s addition of a single letter in Complainant’s Mark is a common example of “typosquatting” and creates a virtually identical and/or confusingly similar domain name to Complainant’s Mark under paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy. ...D2004-0971 (“Numerous panels in the past have found similarity to be present in the case of a deliberate misspelling of a mark (so-called “typosquatting”), by adding, deleting, substituting or reversing the order of letters in a mark.”); see also America Online, Inc. v. ...
2020-09-23 - Case Details
It contains the well-known SIEMENS mark in its entirety, while addition of the “healthineers” element (using additional vowel “e”) makes it a typical case of typosquatting.
The Complainants further allege that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name and is unable to rely on any of the circumstances set out in paragraphs 4(c)(i), (ii) or (iii) of the Policy.
...Furthermore, the disputed domain name adds an extra letter “e” to the SIEMENS HEALTHINEERS trademark, which in the view of the Panel is clear case of typosquatting.
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy is satisfied.
...
2020-12-07 - Case Details
The disputed domain name varies from Complainant’s mark by only one letter – Respondent has replaced the letter “s” with the letter “z”. The disputed domain name is an example of typosquatting. The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s JERZEES mark in both sight and sound.
...Internet searches for “Jerzeez” returns multiple links referencing Complainant and its business. Typosquatting itself has been taken as evidence of bad faith registration by previous UDRP panels. Respondent has demonstrated a nefarious intent to capitalize on the fame and goodwill of Complainant’s trademarks to increase traffic to Respondent’s website for pecuniary gain. ...
2021-02-03 - Case Details
The disputed domain names contain obvious misspellings of that mark and are clear cases of typosquatting.
The Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names. ...The disputed domain name wholly incorporates the non-figurative elements of the BOLLORÉ ENERGY mark, while the disputed domain name incorporates an obvious misspelling of the non-figurative elements of that mark, omitting a letter “L”, a practice commonly known as “typosquatting”. The Panel does not consider this typographical difference capable of dispelling confusing similarity with the Complainant’s trademark. ...
2020-12-21 - Case Details
Applying these tests, the Panel considers that there is a real danger of confusion between both the Complainants’ registered mark "Page 3" and its common law mark "Page3" and the disputed domain name "Pag3.com" for the following reasons:
(a) The Complainants’ high profile would make internet users think that the domain name was connected with or affiliated to the Complainants in some way;
(b) The omission of the letter "e" in the disputed domain name is not such as to eliminate any confusion with the marks;
(c) The potential for confusion on the Internet is very real, given that typing errors by Internet users can be frequent (see WIPO Decision D2000-0587 relating to "typosquatting". See also Telstra Corporation Ltd v. Warren Bolton Consulting Pty Ltd, (WIPO, D2000-1293). In the latter case, the Respondent registered "bigpons.com" in an attempt to divert callers from the Complainant’s website "bigpond.com".
...The Panel further determines that the Respondent has registered and continues to use the domain name in bad faith for the reasons set out above and in particular:
(a) The choice of name is confusingly similar to the Complainants TradeMarks – can be inferred as an opportunistic endeavor to cash in on the Complainants’ goodwill;
(b) The typosquatting factor referred to above; and
(c) The Respondent’s failure to reply to the Complainant’s "cease and desist" letters.
7. ...
2001-01-18 - Case Details
The addition of "www" is immaterial as it is simply an indication of an Internet address and the deletion of the apostrophe is also immaterial in the context of Internet use. In short, this is a typical case of "typosquatting".
The domain name is varied by only one letter, but it is
the first letter of the domain. ...Therefore, this Panelist agrees that this is "typosquatting"
and as such causes confusion between the domain names and the Complainant's
trademarks. ...
2001-09-03 - Case Details
The Complainants allege that the misspelling of the Complainants’ Protected Identifier as described above amounts to typosquatting on the part of the Respondent in registering and using the domain name in dispute. The Complainants cite the decisions of the panels in UDRP cases Amazon.com inc. v. ...The Complainants have also put forward a strong argument that by choosing this particular sequence of letters, the Respondent has engaged in typosquatting. This Panel is not convinced that this is the case, but it is nonetheless clear that through its registration and use of the domain name at issue, the Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract Internet users to a website or other online location by creating confusion with the Protected Identifier in which the Complainants have rights.
...
2008-01-11 - Case Details
The similarity of site content is relevant because there is deception of the consumer and an implied act of unfair competition.
Complainant contends that Respondent is “typosquatting” which is further evidence of bad faith.
Complainant contends that Respondent registered the Domain Name primarily for the purpose of disrupting the business of the Complainant with knowledge that the Complainant is the only entity that could lawfully own the Domain Name.
...The Panel does not agree with Complainant that this is a case of “typosquatting”, because it does not appear that the intent of the Domain Name is to take advantage of a common spelling or typing error, but this makes little difference here. ...
2007-05-09 - Case Details
Changing one letter in a valid mark can often be per se cybersquatting. That is the gist of the typosquatting cases, in which a respondent changes or transposes one or a few letters in a mark, often to nearby letters on a standard computer keyboard. ...The Panel refers to these cases as the “dominant feature” cases.
The facts in this proceeding differ from typosquatting and dominant feature cases in significant respects. The one-letter change is not a misspelling of Complainant’s mark that results in an otherwise nonsensical word or phrase; on the contrary, the Disputed Domain Name and Respondent’s other domain names are everyday phrases incorporating the name of the parlor game. ...
2004-09-27 - Case Details
The Complainants further contend that the Respondent is engaging in typosquatting, relying on mistakes made by internet users to direct internet traffic intended for the Complainants’ website to the Respondent’s site.
(c) Registered and Used in Bad Faith
The Respondent’s domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith based on the following factors: (i) disrupting the business of a competitor by diverting traffic through confusion; (ii) diverting traffic through confusion for monetary gain by offering links to other competing nail care and beauty product sites; (iii) knowledge of the Complainants’ long and continuous use of the Creative Nail Trademarks at the time of registration and that the Respondent had no right, title or interest, whatsoever, in the mark or domain names; (iv) the diverting of traffic through confusion for monetary gain by intentional copying of the Complainants’ look of its website and products; and (v) typosquatting.
B. Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant’s
contentions.
6. Discussion and Findings
Co-Pending Litigation
There is a pending proceeding before the High Court in Ireland filed under Record No. 2003/8682P against the Respondent. ...
2006-09-06 - Case Details
The Complainant also contends that the disputed domain name is an obvious example of ‘typosquatting’ because the Respondent has simply omitted the final letter from the domain name. ...The Panel considers that the Respondent’s choice of domain name was made not only with prior knowledge of the Complainant’s trademark, but also with prior knowledge of its internet address, and that the Respondent adopted the disputed domain name to catch internet users that omitted the final letter from the Complainant’s internet address. Such calculated ‘typosquatting’ amounts to bad faith registration and use of the disputed domain name.
For these reasons, the Panel concludes that the disputed
domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith by Respondent.
7. ...
2005-11-15 - Case Details
In these circumstances a finding of confusing similarity in
line with the “typosquatting” cases is appropriate. See e.g. AltaVista
Company v. Saeid Yomtobian, WIPO Case
No. D2000-0937; America Online, Inc. v. ...Thirdly, at least some of these disputes concerned
allegations of typosquatting by the Respondent. See e.g. CIT Group Inc. v.
SearchTerms and Modern Limited – Cayman Web Development, WIPO
Case No. ...
2006-03-21 - Case Details
Un internaute distrait pourrait aisément
faire une faute de frappe et être redirigé vers le site du Défendeur, ce qui
constitue un cas clair de typosquatting (Décision
D2005-0444, ESPN, Inc. v. XC2 The disputed
domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark. ...Atteinte aux règles de la concurrence et au comportement loyal en matière commerciale
L’expert retient que cette affaire constitue un cas de typosquatting, ceci étant révélateur de mauvaise foi de la part du Défendeur. Il en est de même s’agissant du fait que les noms de domaine litigieux font partie des plus de 1000 noms de domaine bloqués par l’AFNIC et sur lesquels il existe des soupçons de parasitisme.
...
2006-02-14 - Case Details
In order for a domain name to constitute a case of “typosquatting,” the domain name should reflect predictable typographical errors or common misspellings of the Complainant’s trademark.
...In this case, Respondent has apparently amassed a large stockpile of typosquatting domain names. (Complaint Exhibit 6) On this basis, bad faith is also established.
Separately, the Panel notes that to the degree false contact information was provided by Respondent for the registration of as discussed below, the provision of false contact information would be an independent basis for the inference of bad faith in regard to that domain name. ...
2006-10-04 - Case Details
With regards to the domain name , Complainant contends that the Respondent willfully registered a domain name that is a mere typosquatting of the Complainant’s mark to divert Internet traffic. Indeed, in seeking information about Filbanque’s website, Internet users could easily miss typing the “dot” before the generic top level domain “com” being resolved to Respondent’s website.
The same argument of typosquatting is developed with regards to the domain name .
Finally, referring to the domain name , the Complainant contends that this is nearly identical to the Complainant’s mark as said domain name is a mere misspelling of the Complainant’s trademark combined with a hyphen...
2007-08-23 - Case Details
The Panel cannot conceive that the misspelling of “georgiapower” was not intentional and finds that it represents a classical example of typosquatting. It has been long established that typosquatting as such is an indication of bad faith, see for example National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues, Inc., d/b/a Minor League Baseball v. ...
2008-04-28 - Case Details
Tevens is Eiseres blijkens het afschrift uit het handelsregister van de Kamers van Koophandel ingeschreven met één of meer van de Handelsnamen.
Eiseres stelt dat er sprake is van “typosquatting”, het verschijnsel waarbij iemand erop anticipeert dat Internetgebruikers typefouten maken bij het intikken van websiteadressen. ...Verweerder maakte niet - voordat hij kennis kreeg van het geschil - gebruik van de Domeinnamen om te goeder trouw producten of diensten aan te bieden. Aangezien sprake is van typosquatting, is het evident dat Verweerder juist deze Domeinnamen heeft geregistreerd om op parasitaire wijze mee te liften op de merken van Eiser. ...
2008-08-12 - Case Details
The misspelling of the word “csaino” is a form of typosquatting. The letters “a” and “s” are close to each other on a keyboard, therefore it is a likely mistyping of the word “casino”.
...The misspelling of the word “casino” in the disputed domain name is a form of typosquatting. Due to the fact that the spelling of the word “casino” is only slightly altered in the disputed domain name (the letters “a” and “s” have been swapped), it would be a common typographical error. ...
2009-01-22 - Case Details
The domain name differs from the BOULLIOUN service mark by only one letter, which leads to web user confusion and misdirection to Respondent’s website, which amounts to "typosquatting". See Complaint, paragraph 18.
Complainant makes the following arguments with respect to lack of rights of Respondent in the domain name:
1. ...There are a myriad of UDRP cases dealing with typosquatting, i.e. using a slight
variation of a name to create similarity and confusion. See Cimcities, LLC
v. ...
2003-01-16 - Case Details
Sökanden
Sökanden har anfört att de omtvistade domännamnen består av Sökandens varumärke med felstavningar - , s.k. „typosquatting“ - i syfte att utge sig för att vara Sökanden för att vilseleda konsumenter och den stora allmänheten. ...
2021-06-10 - Case Details