The Panel considers this to be a clear case of typosquatting. The Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Trade Mark. The Complainant succeeds on the first element of the Policy.
...Previous UDRP panels have also found that if a respondent has engaged in typosquatting, that may be sufficient to establish registration and use in bad faith (Barnes & Noble College Bookstores, Inc. v. ...
2016-04-27 - Case Details
The Respondent’s registration of the disputed domain name clearly constitutes typosquatting, a practice entailing both confusing similarity and lack of legitimate interests in the disputed domain name;
iii. ...Registered and Used in Bad Faith
As established by countless Panels, typosquatting in and of itself entails bad faith registration and use of a domain name in the context of the Policy. ...
2010-10-12 - Case Details
However, the finding that the Respondent is engaged in typosquatting, and the balance of the evidence, does not support a finding of bona fide use during that period. ...Paragraph 4(b)(vi) of the Policy encompasses typosquatting conduct, and deems it to be evidence of bad faith registration and use. The Panel finds that paragraph to be applicable and declares the Respondent to be engaged in typosquatting conduct in its use of the Disputed Domain Name.
...
2011-02-17 - Case Details
Prior
decisions have often considered the addition or subtraction of a single letter to constitute typosquatting (See
Groupe ADEO v. Privacy Service Provided by Withheld for Privacy ehf / Ivan Urgant, WIPO Case No.
...Dior Interiors, Zion Segev, WIPO Case No. D2009-1431). As a
clear example of typosquatting, the disputed domain name can readily be “considered to be confusingly
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/text.jsp?...
2023-01-10 - Case Details
Furthermore, the Respondent has not provided any evidence to show that it has any rights or legitimate
interests in the disputed domain name. Given the typosquatting nature of the disputed domain name, the
construction of the disputed domain name is likely to mislead or cause confusion, which was likely the intent
of the Respondent when registering such typosquatting domain name, which cannot amount to fair use nor
confer rights or legitimate interests upon the Respondent. ...In the present case, the typosquatting indicates that the Respondent
was aware of the Complainant’s trademark and has added the letters “t” and “r” in order to confuse Internet
users.
...
2023-04-17 - Case Details
In this case, typosquatting is also indicative of a lack of rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name.
As such the Panel finds that the Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Name and that the Complainant has satisfied the second limb of the Policy.
...As held above the Domain Name appears to be a typosquatting registration changing one letter of the Complainant’s widely‑used mark to take advantage of Internet users who mistype the Complainant’s mark. ...
2022-02-07 - Case Details
Complainant further contends that Respondent’s typosquatting is in itself evidence of bad faith.
B. Respondent
The Respondent did not reply to Complainant’s contentions.
6. ...The Panel finds that Respondent has engaged in typosquatting as defined above.
The spelling errors used in typosquatting have been found to produce domain names that are confusingly similar to the marks which they mimic. ...
2007-10-31 - Case Details
The Disputed Domain Name is a clear example of typosquatting as described in section 1.9 of WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions, Third Edition (“WIPO Overview 3.0.)
...It is well established that where there is “typosquatting”, the domain name in question can be considered to be confusing similarly to the trade mark (Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft v. ...
2020-08-27 - Case Details
Indeed, the Panel finds that this is a clear case of typosquatting, which, in itself, constitutes registration and use in bad faith. See, e.g., The Sportsman’s Guide, Inc. v. ...Typosquatting is inherently parasitic and of itself evidence of bad faith.”). A pattern of cybersquatting, of which typosquatting is a form, is further indicative of bad faith. ...
2008-03-31 - Case Details
The Panel also notes that the act of registering a domain name that is almost identical to a well-known mark, except for a slight light deviation, is commonly referred to as “typosquatting” (see ESPN, Inc. v. XC2,
WIPO Case No. D2005-0444). Previous UDRP panels have condemned “typosquatting” and ruled that it may not prevent the domain name from being confusingly similar to the mark which it mimics (see Yahoo! ...Furthermore, the Panel is of the view that the Respondent engaged in “typosquatting” when registering the disputed domain name. It was held by previous UDRP panels that “typosquatting” constitutes unfair use and is the opposite of a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of a domain name (see Microsoft Corporation v. ...
2010-08-17 - Case Details
The Complainant maintains that the Respondent has engaged in typosquatting by adding a “virtually unnoticeable” third lowercase letter “I” to the disputed domain name in order to confuse Internet users.
...The Complainant submits it is beyond dispute that the Respondent is typosquatting, as the disputed domain name is a one-letter misspelling of the Complainant’s HEAVEN HILL mark. ...
2020-07-13 - Case Details
Given the typosquatting nature of the disputed domain name, Respondent had
knowledge of Complainant’s mark and prior rights.
...Milen Radumilo, WIPO Case No. D2019-1600: “Typosquatting itself is evidence
of relevant bad faith registration and use.” See also Go Daddy Software, Inc. v. ...
2024-07-08 - Case Details
The Complainant argues that the Domain Name constitutes a clear case of typosquatting as the Respondent has intentionally misspelled the famous RBC ROYAL BANK trademark by omitting the letter “a” between the letters “b” and “n”. ...It is well-settled that the practice of typosquatting is by itself evidence of the bad faith registration (ESPN, Inc. v. XC2, supra; Longs Drug Stores Cal., Inc. v. ...
2020-12-01 - Case Details
It submits that the Domain Names are examples of "typosquatting", i.e., capitalizing on the near-identity between the Domain Names and its Marks embodying the word"comerica". ...D2001-0970). The two Domain Names are clear cases of "typosquatting" for the reasons already identified above. The Panel finds here that the Respondent's "typosquatting" constitutes registration in bad faith.
...
2014-09-01 - Case Details
Further, this is strongly evocative of the practice commonly referred to as “typosquatting” – the intentional registration and use of a domain name that is a common misspelling of a mark. ...The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s mark in a manner evocative of typosquatting, and there is evidence that the Respondent has engaged in typosquatting in the past. The Respondent is using the disputed domain name in connection with an apparent pay-per-click parking site featuring advertising links to third-party websites offering services competing with those provided by the Complainant under its mark. ...
2011-11-01 - Case Details
The Complainant submits that in registering the disputed domain name, the Respondents have engaged in typosquatting, a practice by which a registrant deliberately introduces slight deviations into famous marks for commercial gain. The Complainant states that because the Respondents’ registration of the disputed domain name constitutes typosquatting, the disputed domain name is, by definition, confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks. ...
2011-12-08 - Case Details
The Complainant asserts that this is a case of “typosquatting”. In connection with the first UDRP element (identity / confusing similarity), citing Edmunds.com Inc v. ...“It is well-settled that the practice of typosquatting, or itself, is evidence of a bad faith registration of a domain name.” (Longs Drugs Stores Cal., Inc. v. ...
2010-07-21 - Case Details
The addition of “www-” to a disputed domain name does nothing to dispel confusion and has been held to constitute a form of typosquatting. Humana Inc. v. HYRO FZ-LLC,
WIPO Case No. D2008-1695; Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Longo,
WIPO Case No. ...It is well settled that diverting Internet traffic, by way of typosquatting, to a website offering sponsored links to competitors of a complainant is prima facie evidence of no rights or legitimate interests. ...
2011-01-06 - Case Details
The Disputed Domain Name is an example of soundsquatting, which is a form of typosquatting. It is well-settled that the practice of typosquatting constitutes evidence of bad faith.
B. ...Further, previous panels have found that if a Respondent has engaged in typosquatting, that is sufficient to establish registration and use in bad faith (Barnes & Noble College Bookstores, Inc. v. ...
2018-05-01 - Case Details
The Complainant argues that the Respondent has engaged in a form of ‘typosquatting’, because the disputed domain name misspells the Complainant’s principal website at “www.dreamhost.com”. ...Typosquatting is the practice of misspelling an element of a mark, and has consistently been regarded as creating domain names confusingly similar to the relevant mark: see e.g. ...
2010-11-09 - Case Details