determines that the so-called passive holding doctrine is applicable here Telstra Corporation Limited v Nuclear Marshmallows WIPO Case No D2000-0003 FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD The Examiner may find that the Complaint was brought in an

used the Panel finds that the passive holding of this disputed domain name does not as such prevent a finding of bad faith on this record See Telstra Corporation Limited v Nuclear Marshmallows WIPO Case No D2000-0003 7 For the disputed domain names

all evidence decided that passive holding of a domain name can satisfy the requirements of paragraph 4 a iii Reproducing famous trademarks in a domain name in order to attract Internet users to an inactive website cannot be regarded as fair use

en la práctica denominada passive holding tenencia pasiva ver por ejemplo National Hockey League v Jean Lucas Domcharme Group Caso OMPI No D2016-0315 Asimismo pese que los nombres de dominio en disputa diadorautility.com.mx diadorautility.mx y

website indicating a passive holding of the disputed domain name having been registered without any evidence of plans for use in connection with bona fide offering of goods or services are factors indicating bad faith registration and use

claims and assertions Its passive holding of the disputed domain name together with the similar holding of a large number of other domain names incorporating the trademarks of others constitutes evidence of use in bad faith within the meaning

the Panel finds that such passive holding even only ten 10 days after registration of the disputed domain names under the abovementioned circumstances constitutes use in bad faith See e.g Telstra Corporation Limited v Nuclear Marshmallows WIPO

bad faith 3 Respondent passive holding of the disputed domain name constitutes bad faith because Complainant trademark has a strong reputation Respondent has not provided any evidence of contemplated good faith use of the disputed domain

disputed domain name has been passively held And the current status of being an passive/inactive domain name does not remove the infringement as determined by many previous UDRP decisions stating that passive holding of a well-known trademark may

in that Respondent s passive holding of a domain name containing a famous trademark constitutes bad faith Therefore The Examiner finds that the requirements set forth by URS 1.2.6.3 have been also met FINDING OF ABUSE or MATERIAL FALSEHOOD

name teamliquid.com is in passive holding parking page since its registration It is used to display advertisements related to the game StarCraft other eSports games and the content of the Complainants website The disputed domain name

�被投诉人被动持有 passive holding � �该裁决作出时，争议域名指向� �Wordpress提供的网站� �该网站� 目为 万宝路的外烟世界 � �网站的负责人自己介绍为 万宝路marlboro爱好� � �

them and asserts that the passive holding of the disputed domain names may amount to bad faith when it is difficult to imagine any plausible future active use of the disputed domain names by the Respondent that would be legitimate and not

has supported findings that passive holding has characterized bad faith use of a domain name in a number of cases The lack of use of a disputed domain name particularly similar to those used by the Complainants is also likely to cause irreparable

domain name followed by a passive holding and the lack of a legitimate use of the disputed domain name suffices to constitute bad faith use of the disputed domain name B Respondent The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant s contentions 6

the question of whether the passive holding of a domain name could constitute bad faith Paragraph 3.2 of the WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Selected UDRP Questions Second Edition WIPO Overview 2.0 states that panels have found that the

to a standard page or a holding page or is inactive proves that respondent is acting in bad faith Indeed the passive holding of a domain name could constitute bad faith notably if i complainant s trademark is well-known and ii it is not

in Bad Faith The Respondent s passive holding of the disputed domain name constitutes bad faith registration and use for the following reasons The actual passive holding of the disputed domain name is evidence of bad faith registration and use

to an inactive site and this passive holding of a domain name is also an indication of bad faith registration and use by the Respondent The Complainant further contents that the Respondent currently holds registrations for several other domain

the Complainant The current passive holding of the disputed domain names also constitute bad faith B Respondent The Respondent did not reply to the Complainant s contentions 6 Discussion and Findings Noting the fact that the Respondent has not