¶ 4 c ii   See for example Google LLC v Bhawana Chandel / Admission Virus FA 1799694 Forum September 4 2018 concluding that a respondent was not commonly known by a disputed domain name incorporating the GOOGLE mark where the relevant WHOIS

domain name resolves to a Google warning page stating Deceptive site ahead and labeling the site as unsafe 5 Parties Contentions A Complainant The Complainant asserts the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Mark because the

is registered with Google LLC the Registrar 3 Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center the Center on February 4 2021 On February 5 2021 the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a

were marked as deceptive by Google Safe Browsing and Complainant s Representative antivirus software with a risk of data loss The fact that the webpages were blocked by independent third parties demonstrates that they represented a risk to

The domain names at issue are googleais.com 20googletagmanager.com gooaglesyndication.com google-stupidix.com googleadservicees.com googleanalytics.site googlecodelibs.com googlesyndicatiofn.com googlesyndiction.com googletagmanag-er.com

et qu une interrogation sur Google révèle des occurrences en lien exclusivement avec la société ARKEMA FRANCE Il observe que le Défendeur n a jamais été en relations d affaires avec lui Il observe encore qu en réalité l obtention du nom

is registered with Google LLC the Second Registrar 3 Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center the Center on February 13 2021 On February 15 2021 the Center transmitted by email to the

had carried even a basic Google search in respect of the wordings INTESA SANPAOLO and INTESA the same would have yielded obvious references to the Complainant The Complainant submitted an extract of a Google search in support of its allegation

ARBITRATION FORUM DECISION   Google LLC v Rekcah Uoy Era Claim Number FA2103001936420   PARTIES Complainant is Google LLC Complainant represented by Fabricio Vayra of Perkins Coie LLP District of Columbia USA Respondent is Rekcah Uoy Era

loan to Complainant's Mark.  Google LLC v Floan Delveir FA2012001925079 Forum Jan 1 2021 The addition of a generic term to a mark does not negate any confusing similarity between a disputed domain name and mark under Policy ¶ 4 a i   The

under Policy ¶ 4 b iv  See Google Inc v Petrovich FA 1339345 Forum Sept 23 2010 finding that a disputed domain name which resolves to a landing page that distributes malware to Internet users computers demonstrates Respondent's bad faith under

name a simple search via Google or any other search engine using the keyword MICHELIN should have demonstrated that all first results related to the Complainant s products or news In this day and age of the Internet and advancement in

are registered with Google LLC The disputed domain name creditmutuel-dsp2-protection.com is registered with Register NV dba Register.eu The disputed domain names credit-mutuel-dsp2-secured.com credit-mutuel-dsp2-secured.org

all the results of a simple Google search are related or refers to the Complainant Therefore the Complainant contends that it is inconceivable that the Respondent could have registered the disputed domain name without actual knowledge of

the Microsoft network and the Google cloud partner program Respondent did not register and is not using the Domain Name in bad faith because among other things 1 the meaning of Takka to Respondent 2 Respondent does not have a history of

Name is registered with Google LLC the Registrar 3 Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center the Center on February 12 2021 On the same day the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a

19 2021   On February 22 2021 Google LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the nodegraph.com domain name is registered with Google LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name Google LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by

its non-use Screenshots of Google search results for INTESA SANPAOLO A letter from Complainant to Respondent dated 8 July 2020 requesting transfer of the disputed domain name to the Complainant Various WIPO ADR decisions concerning similar

Policy ¶ 4 b iii See also Google Inc v Domain Admin FA 1605239 Forum Mar 22 2015 finding that use of the disputed domain name to aid illegal activities unfairly capitalizes on the goodwill established in Complainant's mark exploits the consumer

Policy ¶¶ 4 c i or iii See Google Inc v Gridasov FA 474816 Forum July 5 2005 finding that the respondent's use of a disputed domain name that attempts to download malicious computer software into the computers of those who visit the website