The Panel observes that for several of these Domain Names, the letters “LI” have been positioned before the PSEG mark. The variations suggest possible typosquatting in relation to Complainant’s PSEG trademark. In light of all of this information and the submission from Complainant’s legal counsel that Respondent, in his communications, had admitted he was aware of Complainant and had heard of Complainant’s agreement with the Long Island Power Authority and that he registered the Domain Name variations for the PSEG mark with this in mind, the Panel finds that it is more likely than not Respondent registered all of the Domain Names for reasons other than to create a new marketing channel for his business.
...
2013-11-13 - Informations relatives au litige
Moreover, the whole modus operandi of the Respondents from the initial cybersquatting registration of the domain name, the hope that may be inferred that sooner or later CavinKare may be forced to buy the name, the process of typosquatting to induce consumers to go to other websites, all constitute bad faith. The fact that Respondent 2 is a serial offender only reinforces that conclusion.
...
2005-02-25 - Informations relatives au litige
The Complainant also maintains that, by registering and using the disputed domain names, the Respondent
is engaged in bad faith typosquatting. The Respondent has registered the disputed domain names, which
consist of Complainant’s VERIZON trademark, or obvious misspellings thereof, and obvious misspellings of
the terms “administrative”, “charge”, and “settlement”, and seeks to profit from Internet traffic generated by
the fact that some Internet users might inadvertently misspell the Complainant’s VERIZON trademark and/or
the words “administrative”, “charge”, or “settlement” when they type the address of the Settlement Website
into their browsers as they seek to locate the Settlement Website on the Internet, and will be diverted to one
of the websites at the disputed domain names which feature pay-per-click links to advertisements for third-
party products and services.
...
2024-04-23 - Informations relatives au litige
It is of course
possible that separate cybersquatters may have independently decided to engage in this very particular form
of “typosquatting”, using the same Registrar and at approximately the same time, but this seems improbable.
...
2022-04-04 - Informations relatives au litige
Frequently, Respondent has sought for registrations which make slight variations or “typosquatting” of the concerned trademarks.
• Complainant sent a demand letter to Respondent without response...
2004-06-23 - Informations relatives au litige
The Respondent goes on to argue that the Complainant has engaged in ‘typosquatting’ by registering two domain names that are very similar to the name of its competitor Digivote Ltd and is engaging in the same conduct as it alleges against the Respondent. ...
2005-03-02 - Informations relatives au litige
DNU2019-0004, , transfer. Typosquatting, parking page and sale offer, bad faith
found.
The entity Tool Domains Ltd is connected to the Respondent via the administrative email address associated
with the disputed domain name. ...
2026-04-16 - Informations relatives au litige
The search results confirmed the Presiding Panelist’s
assessment of the Respondent’s intent and conduct as cybersquatting – a determination with which the
majority does not appear to disagree – on account of a number of core factors:
(i) the FORD mark is well-known and used worldwide;
(ii) the disputed domain name incorporates the FORD mark in its entirety, as well as the FORDDIRECT
and FORDDIRECT.COM marks almost in their entirety, with an obvious and common misspelling of these
marks that moreover carries no alternative genuine meaning;
(iii) the disputed domain name used this misspelling for the Respondent’s commercial gain, making for a
classic case of typosquatting; and
(iv) the disputed domain name has been linked to third-party web presence in the automotive industry,
as well as to parked pages displaying pay-per-click links.
...
2022-10-21 - Informations relatives au litige
When stripped of the complications associated with alleged consent, this is, so far as the Domain Name is concerned, essentially a case of typosquatting. The Domain Name was chosen because of its close similarity to domain name under the control of, or otherwise associated with, the Complainant's business. ...
2010-02-05 - Informations relatives au litige
For example, the Panel notes in this respect that in a subsequent
typosquatting case, the author of the Dover Downs decision cited and relied upon United States case
law; see Scrum Alliance, LLC v. ...
2025-09-25 - Informations relatives au litige
Complainant contends that Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith because: (1) Respondent uses the disputed domain name to provide links to Internet users that divert them to other commercial websites that could harm the goodwill associated with Complainant, and is presumably acting for commercial gain either from pop-up advertising or referral fees; (2) Respondent is engaged in “typosquatting” because the disputed domain name differs from Complainant’s trademark solely by the addition of the letter “s”, and; (3) Respondent continued to use the disputed domain name despite correspondence from Complainant objecting to that use.
...
2012-10-15 - Informations relatives au litige
As stated by the Panel in Justice for Children case, supra:
“Decisions under the Policy focus upon a respondent’s use of another’s mark in a domain name to attract Internet users to respondent’s site. This is true in typosquatting cases and in cases where a respondent selected his domain name in anticipation of subsequent sale to the mark owner. ...
2013-05-13 - Informations relatives au litige
Notably, the Complainant contends that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the
Complainant’s C4 and C4 EXTREME trademarks, noting that the replacement of the numeral “4” with the
numeral “5” does not diminish such confusing similarity and is indicative of typosquatting. The Complainant
adds that adding the term “night” does not dispel the confusing similarity of the applicable disputed domain
name to the Complainant’s C4 trademark, nor in either case does the addition of “.ae” diminish this.
...
2026-07-14 - Informations relatives au litige
D2018-1045
(inclusion of a hyphen “irrelevant” for purposes of the Policy)
Given Respondent’s historical pattern of abuse of Complainant’s MCD Mark in an email interception scheme
in the Prior Cases, the Panel considers it reasonable to infer that the variations represent intentional
reconfigurations of Complainant’s email extensions selected by Respondent as typical misspellings,
essentially typosquatting applied to Complainant’s MCD Mark centered email domain names, to be
considered further below. ...
2023-08-08 - Informations relatives au litige
All of these sites
(except for , which impersonated a third party) feature Complainant’s CLARKS Mark,
often with its stylized CLARKS logo, and in all cases without authorization, to falsely impersonate
Complainant and purport to sell its footwear products under the CLARKS and DESERT BOOT Marks;
(ii) all 119 of the Disputed Domain Names themselves share a similar format and lexical pattern involving
the clearly recognizable CLARKS Mark or DESERT BOOT Mark (or a typosquatting variation of such
marks) plus generic, descriptive or geographical terms (such as “sale”, “shoes”, and “mexico”) that
make clear reference to Complainant’s industry and commercial offerings;
(iii) many of the Disputed Domain Names are registered through the same Registrar on the same or
similar dates within short periods of each other. ...
2022-08-12 - Informations relatives au litige