as ads provided through the Google Adsense program 5 mere ownership of a common term domain should in and of itself establish the owner s rights and legitimate interest 6 Complainant has not proffered evidence that demonstrates that Respondent

van derden partijen Google ads Bezoekers konden denken dat het om door Eiseres geautoriseerde advertenties ging Pas op het moment dat er interesse werd getoond in de Domeinnaam heeft Verweerder minimale activiteiten ontplooid om een

site by the use of relevant Google Adsense ads When one enters �www.xn �monografas-r8a.com � into the Wayback Machine at �www.internetarchives.org � one finds that archived pages of the web site show that the domain name at issue was used to

No FA791657 November 13 2006 Google Inc v Burns NAF Case No FA 726096 August 16 2006 The Cheesecake Factory Inc and The Cheesecake Factory Assets Co LLC v Say Cheesecake WIPO Case No D2005-0766 September 12 2005 Napster Inc v Vinscani WIPO Case No

is said to bring up all of Google �s paid searches The Respondent provides its own screen-shot of the web-site further shots showing the results of entering �eterna � in the search box � and the results of a search for the same term performed on

as ads provided through the Google Adsense program � The Respondent asserts that �the links in question are provided pursuant to Google �s terms and are triggered by search requests entered by computer users Furthermore Respondent has no control

code Respondent has provided Google search results using the term INVISALIGN in combination with geographic terms The results show many dentist websites offering Invisalign treatment Id Annexes O & U Other than for the publicly accessible website

the Internet search provider Google As to bad faith the YAHOO mark for Internet search services is used by 100s of millions of Internet users in countries around the world including Russia Respondent has not denied that he had knowledge of

s VIDMAR mark as a Google adword The Complainant s attorneys contacted the Respondent at that time and objected to its unauthorized use of the VIDMAR mark to advertise and promote competing products through Google s search engine During

a trademarked term Second a Google search on the term �international wine accessories � reveals that the first 16 of 20 references are references to Complainant Third a Yahoo search on the term �international wine accessories � not only lists

plan � as evidenced by a Google search Furthermore the Respondent asserts that the domain name is not confusingly similar to the LEASEPLAN Marks as such marks incorporate a descriptive term and minor differences are sufficient to eliminate a

links identified as �Ads by Google � that may qualify as opportunities for �click-through � revenue to Respondent as Complainant alleges Not all of the site deals with consumer privacy there is a consumer blog for baldness that includes more Ads

around the world A Google search conducted for �Nutrisystem � on March 14 2008 produced approximately 1950000 hits the majority of which appear to refer to Complainant or its products and services According to the WHOIS database records

their paid advertisement with Google.co.uk which constitutes a violation of copyright law and that they have used the word �audiotech � in the same way The Complainant states that this clearly shows an intention by the Respondent to steal the

that it was generated by Google without any involvement on the Respondent s part The Panel in the NVT Birmingham case approved the following statement from the decision of the three-member Panel in Grisoft s.r.o v Original Web Ventures Inc

domain Nothing found in a Google search indicates that Respondent is commonly known by the name childcarecareers.com It is obvious that this is done for the purpose of deriving commercial gain Commercial use of a domain name which is so

optimization For example a Google search of the terms �Melaleuca criticism � brings up as the first result the �www.ripoffreport.com � website which as a computer user would expect includes criticism of goods and services associated with the

few pages of an Internet Google search conducted on January 21 2008 against the word whirlpool were associated with the Complainants The Complainants became aware of the disputed domain name in July 2007 The WhoIs record of the disputed domain

third party use of the term A Google search for elite cruises excluding elite-cruises.net to avoid references to Complainant yielded numerous third-party results Among the third party results are the following Elitecruise.com.au Elite Cruises at

provided pursuant to Yahoo or Google �s terms and triggered by search requests entered by computer users The Respondent submits that it did not target the Complainant and argues that it may fairly use descriptive or generic terms or typos of such