The National Arbitration forum in Google v Galloway, found that the Respondent’s domain name was confusingly similar to Complainant’s GOOGLE mark.
This was because the domain name contained Google’s trademark and added only the descriptive terms “finance alerts”. The Panel drew on previous precedents where UDRP panels have found the addition of descriptive terms doesn’t a negate a finding of confusing similarity.
The panel found that the whois information for the Respondent’s domain name was inaccurate and had been used to direct traffic to a website offering financial news and information which the Respondent’s derived a financial benefit from. False whois information has often been sufficient in and of itself to find evidence of bad faith registration, even in the absence of diversion of traffic for commercial gain.
- Google introduces “Major Contributers” to Google Analytics
- Can adding a geographic indicator to a domain name avoid trademark infringement? – Herbalife International, Inc. v. Zainl K.A. Haider
- YouTube wins $1B lawsuit against Viacom
- Attorney-General refers Google WiFi issue to Australian Federal Police
- Google launches Adwords Call Metrics