Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
A.1 Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant submits the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the Complainant’s VANS mark as it consists of the entirety of the mark and adding the generic elements “shoes” and “usa” (the country from in which the Complainant is located, the market to whom the Respondent directed its website, and the jurisdiction in which the Respondent arranged for hosting of its website). ...D2009-0865 (“The addition of the descriptive term “careers” does not affect a finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the NESTLÉ registered mark. It has been consistently decided that the addition of generic or descriptive terms to an otherwise distinctive mark name is to be considered confusingly similar to the mark”); and Quixtar Investments, Inc. v. ...
2012-03-06 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has demonstrated that it owns rights in the MARCH MADNESS trademark. ...D2001-0032 ( and confusingly similar to LEXUS).
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Domain Name, which pairs the distinctive MARCH MADNESS trademark with the less distinctive term “live”, is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s MARCH MADNESS trademark.
...
2012-03-26 - Datos del caso
For this reason already, the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark SCOUT24 of the Complainant.
the Complainant further argues that “phuketscout24” is confusingly similar to its SCOUT24 trademark series. ...Thus, the disputed domain name is solely dominated by the element “Scout24” which is identical to the SCOUT24 trademarks.
The disputed domain name is therefore confusingly similar to the Complainant’s SCOUT24 trademark.
The Panel concludes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
...
2012-02-20 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has demonstrated that it owns rights in the KRISPY KREME trademark. There are many UDRP decisions that find that the pairing of a distinctive trademark with less distinctive terms is confusingly similar to the distinctive trademark. ...D2001-0032 ( et al. confusingly similar to LEXUS).
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Domain Names, which pair the distinctive KRISPY KREME trademark with the generic term “racing,” are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s KRISPY KREME trademark.
...
2012-04-17 - Datos del caso
Complainant
The Complainant states that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its trademark IBM, being a combination of the generic word “shop” and the Complainant’s trademark IBM.
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant is the owner of the trademark IBM both by registration and acquired reputation and that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark IBM.
...
2012-04-12 - Datos del caso
Complainant
The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to its registered AL JAZEERAH trademark, which is phonetically identical to “aljazerah”.
...The Respondent registered a domain name that is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s AL JAZEERA trademark and then used it to host content directly copied from the Complainant’s own website, without permission from the Complainant. ...
2014-12-22 - Datos del caso
- The disputed domain name, , is confusingly similar to the AMEREN service mark, as the mark is fully incorporated within the disputed domain name. ...D2008-0733 (finding to be confusingly similar to the TEREX mark, stating “...the added generic abbreviation for ‘corporation’, ‘corp’, and the gTLD suffix ‘.com’...will not alter the fact that the domain name at issue is confusingly similar to the mark in question”).
...
2015-02-06 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant clearly has demonstrated that it has rights in the DUN & BRADSTREET mark. ...The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s registered mark, and that Complainant meets the first criterion of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
...
2010-12-23 - Datos del caso
For these reasons, the Complainant contends, the Respondent must have been aware that it was using a trademark confusingly similar to ERIC BOMPARD.
The Complainant has conducted a search of the WIPO trademark database and not found an entry for ERIC BOMPART. ...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant asserts trademark rights in the personal name “Eric Bompard”. The trademark is registered in many countries around the world and clearly has a substantial reputation. ...
2011-01-13 - Datos del caso
“Domain names which constitute typosquatting are confusingly similar by definition” (See Hobsons, Inc. v. Peter Carrington a/k/a/ Party Night Inc.,
WIPO Case No. ...D2008-1302).
Therefore, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the trademarks in which the Complainant has rights. As a result, the Panel considers paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy to be satisfied.
...
2012-11-12 - Datos del caso
Discussion and Findings
In order to succeed in its Complaint, the Complainant is required to establish the following elements set out under paragraph 4(a) of the Policy:
(a) that the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights; and
(b) that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate rights in respect of the domain name; and
(c) that the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
6.1 Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has adduced sufficient evidence to prove that it has rights to the OAKLEY trade mark. ...In such instance, the disputed domain name becomes confusingly similar to the OAKLEY trade mark.
Accordingly, this Panel concludes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the OAKLEY trade mark, in which the Complainant has sufficiently proven that it has rights to.
6.2 Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Complainant's assertions had not been rebutted by the Respondent to indicate whether it has any rights or legitimate interests to the disputed domain name. ...
2010-06-02 - Datos del caso
As to whether the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the DOLCE & GABBANA trademark, the relevant comparison to be made is with the second-level part of the disputed domain name only “dolcegabbanastores”, as it is well-established that the generic Top Level Domain suffix (i.e. “.com”) should be disregarded for this purpose.
...Previous UDRP panels have consistently held that a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark for purposes of the Policy when the domain name includes the trademark, or a confusingly similar approximation, regardless of the other terms in the domain name.
...
2012-06-05 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has demonstrated that it owns rights in the WALGREENS trademark. There are many previous UDRP decisions that find that the pairing of a distinctive trademark with less distinctive terms is confusingly similar to the distinctive trademark. ...D2001-0032 ( and confusingly similar to LEXUS). Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Domain Name, which pairs the well-known WALGREENS trademark with the generic term “cloud”, is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s WALGREENS trademark and that the Complainant has satisfied the first element of the Policy.
...
2014-08-11 - Datos del caso
Parties’ contentions
A. The Complainant
Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant argues that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark ISABEL MARANT.
...B. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has established to the Panel’s satisfaction that it has rights in respect of the trademark ISABEL MARANT.
...
2014-08-08 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the Complainant does have trademark rights in the mark CLARISONIC as trademark registrations have been provided.
...The fact that the Domain Name also contains generic elements, as in this case "i" and "australia", shall be disregarded when determining whether a domain name and a trademark are identical or confusingly similar. The Panel therefore finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to Complainant's trademark.
...
2014-05-19 - Datos del caso
The Complainant states further as follows: “The domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s BBVA mark as the two are almost identical. In fact, the Respondent’s Domain Name incorporates the BBVA mark in its entirety combined with “s”. ...the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has provided sufficient evidence of its rights to the trademark BBVA.
...
2004-07-19 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant holds trademark rights in T-MOBILE, which is a well known trademark in the telecommunications industry.
...As stated by the Complainant, with references to previous UDRP decisions, the absence of hyphens or the addition of other terms does not automatically create a domain name that is not identical or confusingly similar to an existing trademark, especially when the trademark is well known.
The Panel therefore concludes that is confusingly similar to Complainant’s mark T-MOBILE.
...
2005-10-25 - Datos del caso
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant has furnished the Panel with plain evidence that the Complainant owns a valid USPTO registration for the trademark LEXAPRO at Exhibit D of the Complaint. ...D2005-1042 (where the panel found the disputed domain name to be confusingly similar to the trademark AMBIEN); and Sanofi-Aventis v. US-Meds.com,
WIPO Case No. D2004-0809 (where the Panel determined that, among others, the disputed domain names and were confusingly similar to the trademark ACOMPLIA).
...
2008-03-05 - Datos del caso
Policy, paragraph 4(a).
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Based upon the trademark registrations cited by Complainant, it is obvious that Complainant has rights in and to the PENGO Trademark.
...D2006-0561 (finding confusingly similar to the trademark PLAYBOY).
Therefore, the Panel is convinced that Complainant has proven the first element of the Policy.
...
2008-12-30 - Datos del caso
Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
A.1 Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant submits that Respondent’s disputed domain names are effectively identical to Complainant’s WILMINGTON TRUST trademark and domain name. ...AAIM, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0403.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Pursuant to Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, Complainant must establish rights in a trademark and secondly that the domain name in dispute is confusingly similar to the trademark in which Complainant has rights.
...
2006-08-22 - Datos del caso