Policy Paragraph 4 c ii See Google Inc v Domain Admin / Whois Privacy Corp FA1502001605239 Forum Mar 22 2015 WHOIS information for the at-issue domain name lists Domain Admin / Whois Privacy Corp as the domain name s registrant and there is

legitimate interests in the google-flight.org domain name The domain name resolves to a website that prominently displays the GOOGLE mark and Google Color Logo as well as the GOOGLE FLIGHTS mark and Google Flights Logo and displays large images

translate the Complaint using Google Translate and that it took longer than expected for the Respondent to do so as the Complaint was filed and served in pdf format In all the circumstances and also taking into account the fact the Response was

Name � is registered with Google Inc the �Registrar � 3 Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center the �Center � on March 12 2018 On March 13 2018 the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a

alleges that first page of Google search results for the term �capitec � lists all references to Capitec in relation to Complainant Complainant further alleges that the registration and use of the Disputed Domain Name by Respondent is use of an

A Complainant Complainant Google LLC operates a search engine has become one of the most highly recognized Internet search services in the world Complainant s primary website is located at google.com and Complainant owns and operates websites

the disputed domain name See Google Inc v Ahmed Humood FA 1591796 Forum Jan 7 2015 This Panel makes that inference Respondent has actual knowledge of Complainant s mark at the time of domain name registration based on the fame of Complainant s

noncommercial or fair use See Google Inc v Pritam Singh / Pandaje Technical Services Pvt Ltd FA 1660771 Forum March 17 2016 agreeing that respondent has not shown any bona fide offering of goods or services or any legitimate noncommercial or fair

is allegedly confirmed by the Google Analytics data submitted by the Respondent The geographical targeting and protection of the rights of the Complainant are locally distributed exclusively in the European Union and do not intersect with the

is allegedly confirmed by the Google Analytics data submitted by the Respondent The geographical targeting and protection of the rights of the Complainant are locally distributed exclusively in the European Union and do not intersect with the

is allegedly confirmed by the Google Analytics data submitted by the Respondent The geographical targeting and protection of the rights of the Complainant are locally distributed exclusively in the European Union and do not intersect with the

with a search engine such as Google leads in the first place to websites relating to the Complainant and its products the Respondent was fully aware of the Complainant �s prior rights in EASYBREATH Trademark since the Disputed Domain Name resolves

April 3 2018 On April 4 2018 Google LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the statefarmsupplement.com domain name is registered with Google LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name Google LLC has verified that Respondent

similar to Complainant s GOOGLE OPEN SOURCE mark because it merely changes the order of the terms in the mark and appends the generic top-level domain gTLD com Additionally Respondent s googleplex.co domain name is confusingly similar to

Policy Paragraph 4 a iii See Google Inc v Domain Name Privacy Protection FA 1732901 Forum June 29 2017 Actual knowledge of a complainant rights in the mark prior to registering the disputed domain name is adequate evidence of bad faith under

the term �oculus venues � in Google �s search engine refer to the Complainant The disputed domain name was registered by the Respondent on October 11 2017 the day the Complainant announced the launch of Oculus Venues and when the Complainant filed

visiting www.securitas.com a Google search or a simple trademark search would have disclosed the Complainant mark especially given the use made of the disputed domain name The disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith The

ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Google LLC v Pcpatchers Case No DAU2018-0006 1 The Parties The Complainant is Google LLC of Mountain View California United States of America United States represented by Cooley LLP United States The Respondent is

See WIPO Case No DMX2012-0006 Google Inc v Robert Takovich Therefore Respondent cannot pretend to have any legitimate interests in the disputed domain name As to registration in bad faith it is implausible that Respondent was unaware of Complainant

to countless consumers See Google Inc v Ahmed Humood FA1411001591796 Forum Jan 7 2015 This Panel makes that inference Respondent has actual knowledge of Complainant s mark at the time of domain name registration based on the fame of Complainant