faith under the doctrine of passive holding While panelists look at the totality of the circumstances in each case factors that have been considered relevant in applying the passive holding doctrine include i the degree of distinctiveness or

faith under the doctrine of passive holding While panelists will look at the totality of the circumstances in each case factors that have been considered relevant in applying the passive holding doctrine include i the degree of distinctiveness or

with the Complainant and by passively holding the other disputed domain names the Respondent is not engaged in a bona fide offering of goods or services under the Policy Given the Complainant s established use of the DOW trademark for 123 years

contact the trademark holder passive holding does not as such prevent a finding of bad faith Examples of what may be cumulative circumstances found to be indicative of bad faith include cases in which i the Complainant has a well-known trademark

that by the Respondent passive holding and the risk of sending phishing emails with the disputed domain name the Respondent is using the disputed domain name in bad faith v The Complainant requests that the disputed domain name be

2 The Panel agrees that the passive holding of a domain name does not necessarily circumvent a finding that the domain name is being used in bad faith within the requirements of paragraph 4 a iii of the Policy See VideoLink Inc v Xantech

faith under the doctrine of passive holding While panelists will look at the totality of the circumstances in each case factors that have been considered relevant in applying the passive holding doctrine include i the degree of distinctiveness or

registered and appears to be passively holding the disputed domain name which is identical to the Complainant �s mark and resolves to a registrar parking page with presently inactive links to �Related Searches � and �Ads � Pursuant to paragraph 4

faith under the doctrine of passive holding While panelists will look at the totality of the circumstances in each case factors that have been considered relevant in applying the passive holding doctrine include i the degree of distinctiveness or

A three-month period of passive holding in and of itself may generally be too short to constitute bad faith use However other relevant factors apart from just a short period of passive holding are present here which when all facts are viewed

d �une société française holding dont la dénomination sociale est AEKORP SAS créée en 2010 dans le secteur de la gestion de patrimoines privés et de droits familiaux Le Défendeur a enregistré le nom de domaine litigieux

that the Respondent �s passive holding of the domain name in this particular case satisfies the requirement of paragraph 4 a iii that the domain name is being used in bad faith by Respondent � It is important to take into account the opinion

faith under the doctrine of passive holding WIPO Overview 3.0 section 3.3 For the above reasons the Panel finds that the condition of paragraph 4 a iii of the Policy has been satisfied 7 Decision For the foregoing reasons in accordance with

recognized that inaction i.e passive holding in relation to a domain name registration can in certain circumstances constitute use of a domain name being used in bad faith See Telstra Corporation Limited v Nuclear Marshmallows WIPO Case No

in that respect The passive holding of a domain name which is confusingly similar to another �s trademark in circumstances where the registrant does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the domain name as is the case here

the Respondent �s current passive holding of the Domain Name is taking into account the overall circumstances of this case particularly the Respondent �s previous use of the Domain Name and the Respondent �s failure to take part in the present

in UDRP decisions that the passive holding of domain names that incorporate well-known trademarks without a legitimate Internet purpose may indicate that the Disputed Domain Names are being used in bad faith under paragraph 4 a iii of the Policy

fair use Rather Respondent is passively holding the coachellaartists.com domain name See Compl Ex H 3 Respondent has registered and uses the coachellaartists.com domain name in bad faith Respondent fails to make an active use of the disputed domain

have acknowledged that the passive holding of a domain name with knowledge that the domain name infringes another party s trademark rights is evidence of bad faith registration and use citing Telstra Corporation Limited v Nuclear Marshmallows

the Respondent �s seemingly passive holding of the disputed domain name prevent the Complainant to register the disputed domain name with the existing risk that the Respondent �s activities would disrupt the Complainant �s business and use of its