4 Forum Nov 19 2003 See also Google Inc v Aloysius Thevarajah FA1295342 p 4 Forum Dec 31 2009 T he googleos.org domain name resolves to a parked website that features hyperlinks to third-parties unrelated to Complainant The Panel assumes that

so my store is suspected of google as a bad online store and of course my rank is getting lower and now I'm getting sued from a OLX company to close my online store by reason of OLX name duplication I hope the panel members can work well and make

Policy Paragraph 4 a iii See Google Inc v Domain Admin FA 1502001605239 Forum Mar 22 2015 finding that use of a disputed domain name to aid illegal activities under Complainant s trademark suggests Respondent s bad faith see also Twitter Inc v

fair use Respondent employs Google AdSense for Domains a domain parking service to place advertisements on its website This is not the first instance Respondent has registered a domain name containing a trademark owner s mark it has a pattern of

totality of circumstances 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

11 2017 On September 11 2017 Google Inc confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the abbvvie.com domain name is registered with Google Inc and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name Google Inc has verified that Respondent is bound by

with the Complainant a Google search would ensure that is not the case the Complainant is asking the Panel to make significant inferences about the conduct and state of mind of the Respondent that are entirely unsupported by any evidence

15 2017 On September 18 2017 Google Inc confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the statefarmltc.com domain name is registered with Google Inc and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name Google Inc has verified that Respondent is bound

Furthermore the results of Google searches of the terms Costco business delivery and Costco delivery show no connection at all to the Respondent Accordingly the Complainant submits that the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain

is registered with Google Inc the Registrar 3 Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center the Center on July 28 2017 On July 28 2017 the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request

similar to the mark See e.g Google Inc v Yongqi Liu FA0912001297473 Forum January 15 2010 finding googleinvest.biz confusingly similar to complainant s GOOGLE mark b Respondent should be considered as having no rights or legitimate interests in

register search or even a Google search prior to the registration of the Domain Name would have informed Respondent of the existence of Complainant's trademarks In conclusion all the above mentioned circumstances confirm that the Domain Name

of Policy Paragraph4 a i See Google Inc v DktBot.org FA 286993 Forum Aug 4 2004 The mere addition of a single letter to the complainant s mark does not remove the respondent s domain names from the realm of confusing similarity in relation to the

Google Inc v BOGOMIL ALEXANDROV / MOTION LTD Claim Number FA1709001748105 PARTIES Complainant is Google Inc Complainant represented by Chantal Z Hwang of Cooley LLP District of Columbia USA Respondent is BOGOMIL ALEXANDROV / MOTION LTD

Policy Paragraph 4 a iii 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

restaurants A quick search on Google returns a number of results that the Respondent attaches as evidence The Respondent states that the disputed domain name has not been registered and is not being used in bad faith The Respondent has already

through the Domain Name See Google Inc v power sky a/k/a wanglun FA1109001407268 Forum Oct 27 2011 finding that the addition of Baidu to Complainant s GOOGLE mark in the googlebaidu.com domain name fails to distinguish the disputed domain name

the disputed domain name 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

Sialkot 51310 PAKISTAN on Google an identical website http //www.scildanintl.com/ has been detected run by the Respondent which is a mirror image of the one connected to the disputed domain but with another brand name SCILDAN Such circumstance

rights in the mark 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