popular search engines e.g Google produce many pages of hits referring to the Complainant products The Complainants are no stranger to domain name disputes Their trade marks L'OREAL and LANCÃ ME appear to be popular targets of spurious

between the Respondent and Google through the Google Adsense program This generates a profit for the Respondent according to the number of clicks Using a domain name which is confusingly similar to a complainant trade mark and which leads to

results for this name on Google This Doman name is great for ANY type of online business or advertisement related to Erectile Dysfunction Medication the possibilities are limitless for this prime domain name The page for LevitraTablets.com is

a Swedish restaurant When you Google SWEA you get 651000 results today Almost all swea.something names have been taken and are in use Swedish Women Educational Association International Inc is a non commercial organization They have no right to

name on April 29 2008 via a Google search for Sour Patch which revealed a website www.sourpatch.org which resolved to an XXX-rated site Subsequently the content was taken down In its place the Respondent posted a notice which recommended

are the thousands of Google search results linked with his name and business as well as the webpages associated with the disputed domain name itself in the notes to the listing of the disputed domain name appears President of Black

The Respondent alleges that google is in common use as a generic verb to describe making an Internet search referring to three dictionary entries and that googler accordingly describes someone who carries out Internet searches He also claims that

Policy Paragraph 4 a i See 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 see also

Policy Paragraph 4 a i See 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 see also Thermo

search engine service of Google Inc and web hosting for the sum of US 71 The Response attaches subsequent email correspondence between the Respondent and the seller concerning the transfer of control over this website which was associated with

reputation A search of Google entering the Trademark as a keyword reveals a large number of entries including the Trademark and the Complainant The websites bearing the Domain Names do not use the Domain Names for anything other than a means

Policy Paragraph 4 a i See Google Inc v DktBot.org FA 286993 Nat Arb Forum Aug 4 2004 finding that a complainant established rights in the GOOGLE mark through its holding of trademark registrations around the world see also Thermo Electron Corp

as an antiviral preparation A Google search in which the keyword is tamiflu reveals pages of references to the Complainant TAMIFLU product which is used as an application against bird flu The Complainant has received widespread publicity around the

the space between words See Google Inc v Jon G FA 106084 Nat Arb Forum Apr 26 2002 finding googel.com to be confusingly similar to the complainant s GOOGLE mark and noting that t he transposition of two letters does not create a distinct mark

links posted under a Google AdSense arrangement which leads to commercial offers of third companies Complainant contends that the misuse of its famous trademark/trade name for this purpose demonstrates that Respondent deliberately tries to

the Complainant through the Google Yahoo and/or Microsoft advertising networks which are displayed on the Respondent s websites as the Complainant has no control over which websites the advertisements are displayed The Respondent has attempted to

with the USPTO See 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 see also

the marks with the USPTO See 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 see also Am Int

on the Internet search engine Google.com for the words barbi twins yields innumerable third-party web pages that have no reference to the words dolls or toys that Complainant s trademark is limited to Barbi is not a misspelling of the mark Barbie

links sponsored by Google as well as links to other sites only some of which relate to celebrities The Respondent is clearly making a commercial use of the website and the Panel infers that it is receiving a commercial profit from the