to the ENTERPRISE mark See Google Inc v Private Person / Andrey Skorodubov FA 1506184 Nat Arb Forum Jul 28 2013 Enterprise Holdings Inc v Tynia Coleman/New Life Family Ministries FA1007001333282 Nat Arb Forum Aug 10 2010 The addition of a single

platforms such as Facebook Google plus Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest etc Respondent did not respond to an April 2014 cease and desist letter sent by Complainant s in-house counsel The domain name is currently parked 5 Parties Contentions A

and its success creator A Google search of Dietrich Mateschitz name conducted on August 18 2014 includes over 400000 hits that relate to him and/or his business They state that his clear connection between the First Complainant s name and the

una búsqueda en el buscador Google de la expresión todoapuestas 50 de los primeros 60 resultados corresponden a la Demandante En este sentido es muy significativo el alto volumen de operaciones de la Demandante en el ejercicio 2013 Además las

Case No D2004-0784 citing Google Inc v wwwgoogle.com and Jimmy Siavesh Behain WIPO Case No D2000-1240 Casio Keisanki Kabushiki Kaisha Casio Computer Co Ltd v Jongchan Kim WIPO Case No D2003-0400 Downstream Technologies LLC v Bartels System GmbH

SOFITEL LEGEND trademark or Google search would have revealed to the Respondent the existence of the Complainants and their trademark With the advancement of the Internet and information technology which helps the reputation of brands and

Paragraph4 c iii See also Google Inc v Gridasov FA 474816 Nat Arb Forum July 5 2005 finding that the use of the disputed domain name that attempts to download malicious computer software is harmful to the complainant as the users may assume the

in the field of business on Google in 2012 at the age of twenty three imparted training to students of a premier business school in India The Complainant claims prior use of the abbreviated version of his name on social media sites including

the OHIM on line database A Google search for FIBERING found no identical company name or trademark The Respondent made the trademark application shown in section 4 above for FIBERING identical to its company name in good faith The disputed

as indicated by the fact that Google searches return hits that virtually all refer to the Complainant and no other person company or product The Domain Name is identical to the Complainant s name with only the extension com added As such it is

in the United States a simple Google search a review of the Complainant s website and the various domain names registered by the Complainant Furthermore the Respondent was clearly aware from the Complainant s software package and license agreement

error page which stated Oops Google Chrome could not find tumbld.com the domain name did not demonstrate a bona fide offering of goods and services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use since the domain Tumblr Inc v zhao xiaobing

similar domain name Google Inc v Petrovich FA 1339345 Nat Arb Forum September 23 2010 finding that disputed domain names which distribute malware to Internet users computers demonstrate Respondent s bad faith under Policy Paragraph 4 b iv

on search engines including Google Yahoo and MSN The Complainant website at www.fidelity.co.uk has at least a quarter of a million visitors every month Services are also promoted through websites connected to the Complainant registered domain

on search engines including Google Yahoo and MSN The Complainant website at www.fidelity.co.uk has at least a quarter of a million visitors every month Services are also promoted through websites connected to the Complainant registered domain

on search engines including Google Yahoo and MSN The Complainant website at www.fidelity.co.uk has at least a quarter of a million visitors every month Services are also promoted through websites connected to the Complainant registered domain

Complainant also shows that a Google search for the term ArcelorMittal provides links only in connection with the Complainant It can therefore be concluded that the Respondent was or at least should have been aware of the Complainant s business and

Complainant brought a recent Google search for CITADEL FUNDING returns at least 7 websites regarding Citadel LLC on the very first page of the search results Except for the Respondent s infringing use of CITADEL FUNDING the first and second

1 2014 ii since April 5 2014 Google searches for Virtual FlyBox and VirtualFlyBox listed the Complainant www.thevirtualflybox.com website in the top five search results and iii since June 1 2014 Google searches for Virtual FlyBox and VirtualFlyBox

evidence that using a Google search all of the first 100 entries relate to the ADAC trademark and Complainant Additionally Complainant owns and operates other domain names embodying the ADAC mark including but not limited to adac.de