s bad faith See e.g Google v Zhou Murong Claim Number FA1108001403692 Sept 30 2011 All of the disputed domain names have been previously found to be confusingly similar to Complainant s GOOGLE mark Respondent is using these confusingly

a DNS error page stating Oops Google Chrome could not find tumblr.com.co Respondent s failure to make active use of the disputed domain name indicates neither a Policy Paragraph 4 c i bona fide offering of goods or services nor a Policy Paragraph 4

similarity analysis See Google Inc v Private Person / Andrey Skorodubov FA 1506184 Nat Arb Forum July 28 2013 finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the complainants mark regardless of the omission of a letter and

Policy Paragraph 4 a ii See Google Inc v asa dsye FA 1519857 Nat Arb Forum Oct 21 2013 The Panel notes that the website resolving from Respondent s disputed domain name features the message Welcome Site just created Real content coming soon The

Paragraph 4 a i See e.g Google Inc v DktBot.org FA 286993 Nat Arb Forum Aug 4 2004 finding that the complainant had established rights in the GOOGLE mark through its holding of numerous trademark registrations around the world The Panel

FINDINGS Complainant is Google Inc of Mountain View CA USA The GOOGLE name and company were created in 1997 by Larry Page and Sergey Brin The GOOGLE name has been continuously used since that time primarily as a search engine available to

s mark with the letter i In Google Inc v DktBot.org FA 286993 Nat Arb Forum Aug 4 2004 the panel explained that the mere addition of a single letter to the complainant s mark does not remove the respondent s domain names from the realm of

arbitration forum DECISION Google Inc v Domain Admin PrivacyProtect.org Claim Number FA1401001538409 PARTIES Complainant is Google Inc Complainant represented by Katie Krajeck of Cooley LLP California USA Respondent is Domain Admin

is not a legitimate use See Google Inc v Petrovich FA 1339345 Nat Arb Forum Sep 23 2010 Respondent s failure to make an active use of the disputed domain names except for the purpose of downloading malicious computer software is not a use in

Internet users through to a Google web search page as evidenced by Exhibit E Policy Paragraph 4 a iii Respondent s Bad Faith Use and Registration Respondent s only use for the domain name is to shuttle Internet users to a Google web search

are auto-generated by Google and that these are constantly changing based on solely Google s algorithm keyword advertising inventory and user search behaviour 5.19 Turning to the requirements of the Policy the Respondent contends so far as

ƒè™‘çš„ã ‚ The Google Translation included in the evidence translates this paragraph as follows But after receiving your email I realized that you do not want me to use the domain name I am very sorry that this is unreasonable so

an Internet search through Google shows that Corian is a product associated with and marketed by Complainant and that Respondent does not have a connection with Corian Complainant alleges and presents evidence that the website at the Disputed

that Internet searches on the Google search engine for lpg keymodule provide relevant information press articles and references to the Complainant in the first results The Complainant asserts that the dominant components of the disputed domain name

also highlights that a Google search for Social Point shows more than 1 million results the first ones being directly related to the Complainant The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is identical to its trademark SOCIAL

WIPO Case No D2004-0962 Google Inc v Nijat Hassanov WIPO Case No D2011-1054 B Rights or Legitimate Interests As the Panel finds that the Complainant has failed to meet the requirements under paragraph 4 a iii of the Policy for the reasons

on the Turkish version of the Google search engine produces only references to the Complainant its group companies and its Turkish distributor In all of these circumstances the Panel finds that the Respondent is more likely than not to have had

submits using evidence from Google Analytics that its website at www.myprotein.com has received more than 586000 hits which has resulted in more than 33000 transactions in Ireland through its Eire version of the website in the last three years

adopts what was said in Google Inc v Mohammed Jabbari WIPO Case No DIR2005-0001 namely a wish to passively hold a domain name is not a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name without any intent for commercial gain and to

online locations such as Google s g.co and Twitter s t.co See the co registry operator s website at www.go.co and the Wikipedia article CO Consequently the Panel concludes that the co portion of the Domain Name does not materially affect the