On February 15, 2000, Respondent had already registered the domain name "yahoo.com.uy". Respondent has linked the Domain Names to its Spanish language website on pets under the yahoo.com.uy domain name.
...Applicable Rules
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy directs that Complainant must prove each of the following:
(i) the domain name in issue is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant's trademark, and
(ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in respect of the domain name, and
(iii) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
...
2000-08-11 - Datos del caso
The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal
requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
1 The Complaint was originally filed involving the disputed domain names and another domain name which was removed in the
amended Complaint.
...The presence of the
word “project” within the disputed domain name does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity between
the disputed domain name and the Complainant’s SOUTHERN COMPANY mark. ...
2023-08-09 - Datos del caso
Respondent is KAI YIP CHEUNG, United States.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Dynadot Inc (the “Registrar”).
3. ...case=D2024-3720
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/search/overview3.0/
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Super73, Inc. v. KAI YIP CHEUNG
Case No. D2025-4168
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
3. Procedural History
4. ...
2025-12-16 - Datos del caso
In Annex E to the Complaint a print-out of the page that is being displayed when you type "www.lumon.info" in the Internet browser window is provided. The current domain name registrant of the domain name , the Respondent to this Complaint Procedure, has not yet linked active web pages to his domain name, even though the domain name was already registered in 2001. ...As far as the Complainant can deduce from the page displayed under "www.lumon.info", the domain name holder is not using the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services.
...
2003-06-20 - Datos del caso
The Respondent is E Net
Marketing Ltd., Antigua, Antigua and Barbuda.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name
is registered with Moniker Online Services, LLC.
3. ...See SembCorp Industries Limited v. Hu Huan Xin, WIPO
Case No. D2001-1092.
The Panel also views the
Respondent’s failure to respond as further evidence that it has no rights
or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. ...
2007-03-07 - Datos del caso
The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to the Complaint satisfied the formal
requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...The disputed domain name incorporates the Complainant’s trademark in full with the addition of the suffix
“eur”, which does not render the disputed domain name distinct from the Complainant’s trademark.
...
2022-04-12 - Datos del caso
The Respondent is Brandon Seppelt, United States.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with NameSilo, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...See
WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.1; AXA SA v. Huade Wang, WIPO Case No. D2022-1289.
On this point, the Complainant asserts, among other things, that: (1) the Respondent is not known by and
has never been known by the disputed domain name; (2) the Respondent has not used, nor made
preparations to use, the disputed domain name in connection with any bona fide offering of goods or
services; and (3) the Respondent is not making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed
domain name. ...
2025-05-14 - Datos del caso
Finally, the Respondent’s said communications were signed “Manager. / Naresh, V.”, thus linking these to the present Respondent as found in the WhoIs record for the disputed domain name.
...This might have indicated that the Respondent was making demonstrable preparations to use, or was using, the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services. However, as in the recent case of Velcro BVBA v. ...
2019-08-08 - Datos del caso
These are conjunctive requirements; both must be satisfied for a successful complaint: see e.g., Burn World-Wide, Ltd. d/b/a BGT Partners v. Banta Global Turnkey Ltd,
WIPO Case No. D2010-0470.
Generally speaking, a finding that a domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith requires an inference to be drawn that the respondent in question has registered and is using the disputed domain name to take advantage of its significance as a trademark owned by (usually) the complainant.
...The use of PPC links to direct browsers to third-party insurance services is indicative of the circumstances outlined in paragraph 4(b)(v) of the Policy.
Bearing in mind that the disputed domain name was registered only in October 2020, it appears likely that the disputed domain name was registered for these purposes.
...
2021-02-26 - Datos del caso
The Center verified that the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...Decision
For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name, be transferred to the Complainant.
Irina V. Savelieva
Sole Panelist
Date: January 30, 2014...
2014-02-19 - Datos del caso
The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amended Complaint satisfied the formal
requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for
Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”).
...It is also well accepted that a generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”), in this case “.com”, is typically ignored
when assessing the similarity between a trademark and a domain name. ...
2023-01-31 - Datos del caso
The Respondent is N.A. Domain Administrator, West Bay, Null WB, Saint Kitts and Nevis.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Best Site Names, Inc.
3. ...As described by the panelist in Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu v. Henry Chan,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0584, such websites offer a revenue program which pays domain name owners (in the particular case) “50% of all revenues generated from searches, popunders, popups, and exit popups” in respect of users directed to its website through the participants domain name.
...
2007-05-31 - Datos del caso
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Coöperatie Univé U.A. v. Ashantiplc Ltd / c/o Domain Name Privacy LLC
Case No. D2011-0636
1. The Parties
The Complainant is Coöperatie Univé U.A. of Arnhem, Netherlands, represented by Novagraaf Nederland B.V., Netherlands.
...Allegations of reverse domain name hijacking have been upheld in circumstances where a respondent’s use of a domain name could not, under any fair interpretation of the facts, have constituted bad faith, and where a reasonable investigation would have revealed the weaknesses in any potential complaint under the Policy; see Jazeera Space Channel TV Station v. ...
2011-07-15 - Datos del caso
The Respondent is Domains By Proxy, LLC, DomainsByProxy.com, United States of America / 志斌 谢
(Zhibin Xie), China.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the
“Registrar”).
3. ...See Sanofi-aventis v. Igor Peklov, WIPO Case No.
D2008-1419; see also Chrome Hearts LLC v. James Hart, WIPO Case No. DCC2011-0005 (“The fact that
counterfeit goods are being sold through this medium indicates that the disputed domain name is being used
in bad faith”).
...
2022-07-27 - Datos del caso
The Respondent is JUNG HOCHUL, also known as Hochul Jung, Pyungkwang, Apt. 101-1206, Hayang-up, Kyongsan Kyongbuk, 712-900, Korea.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The domain name in dispute is .
The Registrar with which the domain name is registered is Register.com, Inc.
3. ...Crew Int’l, Inc. v. crew.com, WIPO Case No. D2000-0054, April 20, 2000). A Domain Name Speculator crosses the line and acts in bad faith within the meaning of the Policy when it knowingly acquires a domain name that incorporates another company’s famous trademark or service mark for speculative purposes. ...
2001-02-02 - Datos del caso
The Respondent is Farid Hamed Aryaee, Ivory Coast.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The Disputed Domain Name (the “Disputed Domain Name”) is registered with PDR Ltd. d/b/a PublicDomainRegistry.com (the “Registrar”).
3. ...See Match.com, LP v. Bill Zag and NWLAWS.ORG,
WIPO Case No. D2004-0230.
In this case, the Panel holds that the Respondent registered the Disputed Domain Name in bad faith because the Trademark distinctively identifies the Complainant and the Complainant’s Trademark so that the choice of the Disputed Domain Name cannot be reasonably explained otherwise than as a reference to the Complainant and to the Trademark. ...
2020-11-05 - Datos del caso
Petitioner
The Petitioner is Lonza Ltd., Switzerland, represented by Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd., United States of Amer-
ica.
2. Domain Holder
The Domain Holder is [Name Removed], China.
3. Domain Name and Procedural History
This Alternative Dispute Resolution proceeding relates to the domain name .
...Glossier, Inc. v. E.M.R., WIPO Case No. DSE2018-0034 (July 30,
2018). Further, the Domain Holder is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, so its actions do
not fall within Paragraph 7.2.3. ...
2025-02-12 - Datos del caso
As noted in Research In Motion Limited v. Dustin Picov,
WIPO Case No. D2001-0492, when a domain name is so obviously connected with a complainant, the very use of the domain name by a registrant with no connection to the complainant suggests “opportunistic bad faith”. See also Paule Ka v. Paula Korenek,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0453. In view of the foregoing, the Panel can ascribe no motive for the Respondent’s registration and use of the Domain Name as reflected in the record except to trade on the goodwill associated with the Complainant’s mark.
...
2013-04-16 - Datos del caso
The Respondent is Ranked Domains, Santiago, Dominican Republic.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Dynadot, LLC.
3. ...- The addiction of the gTLDs “.com”, which is required for registration of a domain name has no distinguishing capacity in the context of a domain name and does not alter the value of the trademark represented in the domain name.
...
2010-11-22 - Datos del caso
The Respondent is Applepie Solutions Limited of Galway, Ireland, represented
by Keaveny Walsh & Co., Ireland.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with Easyspace.
3. ...Complainant
Identical or Confusingly Similar
Through extensive sales, advertising and marketing, the Complainant has acquired a very substantial reputation in its mark Magners.
The disputed domain name is identical and confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademarks.
The use of the disputed domain name is an “instrument of fraud” for the purposes of passing off in accordance with the English decisions in British Telecommunications plc v. ...
2006-02-21 - Datos del caso