In the case of WIPO D2017-0818, the domain name in dispute was “hexmon.com”. The complainant in this case was Tupras Turkiye Petrol Rafinerileri A.S. (TUPRAS), while the respondent was listed as Domain Administrator, See PrivacyGuardian.org / Michael Smith, Wizarc Computing. The panelist presiding over the case was Ian Lowe. The decision date for this case…

In the WIPO case D2000-1151, the complainant, the World Wrestling Federation Entertainment, Inc., filed against Michael Bosman over the domain name “worldwrestlingfederation.com.” The case, filed in 2000, revolved around trademark rights and the domain name’s similarity to the complainant’s trademark. The panel ruled in favor of the complainant, establishing that the domain name was confusingly…

In the WIPO case D2006-0645, the complainant was “F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG” against the respondent “WhoisGuard.” The dispute involved the domain name “buyxenical.com.” The complainant, a pharmaceutical company, owned the trademark for Xenical, a weight loss medication. The complaint was filed on July 3, 2006. The panel found that the domain name was identical or…

The WIPO case D2008-1537 involved a dispute over the domain name “image3d.net” between the complainant, Richard L. Dubnow of Oregon, USA, and the respondent, International Brains Center S.L. of Madrid, Spain. Dubnow, operating under the business Image3D, held a US registered trademark and an international trademark application for IMAGE3D. The domain was registered by the…

The WIPO Case D2011-0806 involved a dispute over the domain name “iuno.com” between the complainant, IUNO Advokatpartnerselskab, a Danish law firm, and the respondent, Angela Croom. The domain was registered in 2000 by Croom, while IUNO Advokatpartnerselskab only began using the “Iuno” name in 2011. The panel concluded that the domain name was not registered…

In the WIPO Case D2012-0455, ELK Accessories Pty Ltd. of Australia filed a complaint against the domain “elk.com,” registered by an entity in the United States. ELK Accessories, involved in fashion, cited their trademark registrations in Australia and the UK as the basis for their claim. However, the domain was registered in 1995, long before…

In the case of Scandinavian Leadership AB and Mindo AB v. Internet Masters (Case No. D2012-1273), the dispute centered around the domain name “mindo.com.” The complainants, Scandinavian Leadership AB and Mindo AB from Sweden, argued that the domain name was identical to their registered trademark MINDO. They claimed that the respondent, Internet Masters from Ecuador,…

Overview The WIPO Case D2012-2179 involved a dispute over the domain name “swash.com.” The complainant in this case was The Procter & Gamble Company, a well-known American corporation that manufactures and sells consumer products, including household cleaning and washing products. The respondent was Marchex Sales, Inc. Factual Background Complainant: The Procter & Gamble Company (USA),…

Overview of the Case In the WIPO Case D2013-1238, a domain name dispute was filed by M/s. Core Diagnostics, a company based in Gurgaon, India, against Herr Guenter Keul of Steinfurt, Germany. The case revolved around the domain name “corediagnostics.com.” Key Aspects of the Case Complainant: M/s. Core Diagnostics, represented internally. Respondent: Herr Guenter Keul.…

Background and Parties Involved In the WIPO Case D2013-1691, the dispute involved the domain name “qlp.com.” The complainant in this case was Quality Logo Products, Inc., a company based in Aurora, Illinois, USA, engaged in customized printing services. They were represented by Golan & Christie LLP, USA. The respondent was Get On The Web, Ltd.,…