for Kalyan Jewellers on Google or otherwise on the Internet at this time would be pointless given Complainant s extensive marketing efforts and use of well-known brand ambassadors to promote its brand products and services Based on what the

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

disputed domain name See e.g Google Inc v Star Co Ltd FA0901001245134 Forum March 25 2009 finding changes made to a website after receiving notice of infringement did not create rights or legitimate interests in disputed domain citing Wal-Mart

FORUM � � DECISION � Google LLC v.� Narges Sanaei Claim Number FA2007001906142 � PARTIES Complainant is Google LLC Complainant represented by Fabricio Vayra of Perkins Coie LLP United States.� Respondent is narges sanaei Respondent United

Політики UA див Google LLC v Aлександр � митрович Бутенко справа �'ОІ� No DUA2020-0009 З урахуванням наведеного вище Комісія приходить до висновку що

be confusingly similar to the GOOGLE OPEN SOURCE mark as the domain name consists of the mark with the terms transposed �The WIPO Overview 3.0 at � 1.7 states that the test for confusing similarity typically involves a side-by-side comparison of

� DECISION � Google LLC v Domain Administrator / Fundacion Privacy Services LTD Claim Number FA2007001904443 � PARTIES Complainant is Google LLC Complainant represented by Fabricio Vayra of Perkins Coie LLP District of Columbia United States.�

the Complaint without using Google Translate Paragraph 10 b and c of the Rules require the Panel to ensure that the Parties are treated with equality that each Party is given a fair opportunity to present its case and that the administrative

est enregistré auprès de Google LLC ci-après désigné l Unité d enregistrement 3 Rappel de la procédure Une plainte a été déposée par Cerba Healthcare auprès du Centre d arbitrage et de médiation de l Organisation Mondiale de la

typing the term WhatsApp into Google s search engine exclusively refer to the Complainant iii According to the Complainant s research in addition to the disputed domain name the Respondent has also previously registered the following domain names

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 Panel reviewed the submitted extract of a Google search and finds that it raises

as evidence the results of a Google search for BIODERMA STORE where all results point to the Complainant's activities Although the terms BIO and DERMA on their own are in reasonably common use as abbreviations or as indicators and the Respondent

FORUM � � DECISION � Google LLC v Chia Chuan Lee Claim Number FA2008001907337 � PARTIES Complainant is Google LLC Complainant represented by Fabricio Vayra of Perkins Coie LLP District of Columbia United States.� Respondent is Chia Chuan

short-form mobile video In Google Play more than 500 million users have downloaded the TikTok app The app is ranked as 1 in Entertainment in the Apple Store and 3 in Social in Amazon The Complainant also has a large Internet presence through its

NOVARTIS and pharma in the Google and Baidu the leading search engine in China search engine the returned results all pointed to the Complainant and its business activities and not to the Respondent The Respondent could have easily performed an

use of a mark See Google Inc v Ahmed Humood FA 1591796 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's

27 2020 � On July 28 2020 Google LLC confirmed by e-mail to the Forum that the stroerandgraf.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

� 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

to submit a response see also Google Inc v S S / Google International FA1506001625742 Forum Aug 4 2015 Respondent did identify itself as �Google International in connection with its registration of the Disputed Domain Name and this is reflected in

WIPO Case No D2004-0962 Google Inc v Nijat Hassanov WIPO Case No D2011-1054 In view of the finding above the Panel is satisfied that the Complainant has met the requirements under paragraph 4 a i of the Policy B Rights or Legitimate Interests