DECISION
Google LLC v. ZEJIA WU / NEXTC LTD
Claim Number: FA2507002167382
PARTIES
Complainant is Google LLC ("Complainant"), represented by Griffin Barnett of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, District of Columbia, USA. Respondent is ZEJIA WU / NEXTC LTD ("Respondent"), China.
REGISTRAR AND DISPUTED DOMAIN NAME
The domain name at issue is <veo3-ai.com>, registered with Porkbun LLC.
PANEL
Alan L. Limbury, as Panelist.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Complainant submitted a Complaint to Forum electronically on July 24, 2025. Forum received payment on July 24, 2025.
On July 24, 2025, Porkbun LLC confirmed by e-mail to Forum that the <veo3-ai.com> domain name is registered with Porkbun LLC and that Respondent is the current registrant of the name. Porkbun LLC has verified that Respondent is bound by the Porkbun LLC registration agreement and has thereby agreed to resolve domain disputes brought by third parties in accordance with ICANN's Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Policy").
On July 28, 2025, Forum served the Complaint and all Annexes, including a Written Notice of the Complaint, setting a deadline of August 22, 2025 by which Respondent could file a Response to the Complaint, via e-mail to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative, and billing contacts, and to postmaster@veo3-ai.com. Also on July 28, 2025, the Written Notice of the Complaint, notifying Respondent of the e-mail addresses served and the deadline for a Response, was transmitted to Respondent via post and fax, to all entities and persons listed on Respondent's registration as technical, administrative and billing contacts.
Having received no response from Respondent, Forum transmitted to the parties a Notification of Respondent Default.
On August 25, 2025, pursuant to Complainant's request to have the dispute decided by a single-member Panel, Forum appointed as Panelist.
Having reviewed the communications records, the Administrative Panel (the "Panel") finds that Forum has discharged its responsibility under Paragraph 2(a) of the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the "Rules") "to employ reasonably available means calculated to achieve actual notice to Respondent" through submission of Electronic and Written Notices, as defined in Rule 1 and Rule 2. Therefore, the Panel may issue its decision based on the documents submitted and in accordance with the ICANN Policy, ICANN Rules, Forum's Supplemental Rules and any rules and principles of law that the Panel deems applicable, without the benefit of any response from Respondent.
RELIEF SOUGHT
Complainant requests that the domain name be transferred from Respondent to Complainant.
PARTIES' CONTENTIONS
A. Complainant
Created in 1998, Complainant, Google LLC, is a global company with offices throughout North America, Europe, Latin America, Asia Pacific, Africa and the Middle East. Its Google search engine has become one of the most highly recognized Internet search services in the world. Complainant's primary website is at "www.google.com", and Complainant owns and operates hundreds of GOOGLE-formative domain names, including nearly every top-level country code domain consisting solely of the GOOGLE mark. In 2025 Brand Finance ranked GOOGLE as the third most-valuable brand in its Global 500 ranking.
On May 14, 2024, Google announced its artificial intelligence ("AI") powered video generation offering under the name and trademark VEO. On December 16, 2024, Google announced and launched Veo 2, the second iteration of its AI-powered video generation offering. On May 20, 2025, Google announced and launched Veo 3, its third iteration of Google's AI-powered video generation offering. There has been extensive unsolicited media coverage relating to the VEO products.
Respondent registered the <veo3-ai.com> domain name on May 21, 2025, more than one year after Google launched Veo, more than five months after Google launched Veo 2, and one day after Google launched Veo 3.
The <veo3-ai.com> domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant's VEO mark.
Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest in the <veo3-ai.com> domain name. Respondent is not licensed or otherwise authorized to use the VEO trademark, nor any other trademarks owned by Complainant. Whois records do not suggest that Respondent is known as Veo 3, Veo, or any variation of Veo. Respondent has not used and is not using the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services or a legitimate noncommercial or fair use. On the contrary, Respondent is using the domain name in connection with a website that is clearly intended to pass itself off as Complainant or to create the impression that the website is operated by or is affiliated with, sponsored or endorsed by, or otherwise authorized by Complainant in relation to its VEO offerings to attract consumers to Respondent's competing AI offering.
Even if some consumers see the disclaimer on Respondent's website, directly after the statement "Google Veo3 is now available on veo3-ai.com", it does not mitigate the likelihood that most consumers would be confused as to whether Complainant is somehow associated with Respondent's website.
The evidence overwhelmingly supports the conclusion that Respondent opportunistically registered and is using the <veo3-ai.com> domain name in bad faith. The notoriety and distinctive qualities of the VEO trademark, the timing of the registration of the domain name, and the content displayed on the associated website render it wholly implausible that Respondent independently and innocently registered the domain name.
Panels have held that the use of an infringing domain name through an associated email address may constitute bad faith. Here, Respondent holds itself out as Complainant on its associated website and invites Internet users to contact Respondent by emailing the <support@veo3-ai.com> email address.
In this context, Respondent's use of a proxy service to hide its actual registration information is further evidence of bad faith, as is Respondent's use of false or incomplete contact information by including no street address when registering the domain name.
B. Respondent
Respondent failed to submit a Response in this proceeding.
FINDINGS
Complainant has established all the elements entitling it to relief.
DISCUSSION
Paragraph 15(a) of the Rules instructs this Panel to "decide a complaint on the basis of the statements and documents submitted and in accordance with the Policy, these Rules and any rules and principles of law that it deems applicable."
Paragraph 4(a) of the Policy requires that Complainant must prove each of the following three elements to obtain an order that a domain name should be cancelled or transferred:
(1) the domain name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; and
(2) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and
(3) the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
In view of Respondent's failure to submit a response, the Panel shall decide this administrative proceeding on the basis of Complainant's undisputed representations pursuant to paragraphs 5(f), 14(a) and 15(a) of the Rules and draw such inferences it considers appropriate pursuant to paragraph 14(b) of the Rules. The Panel is entitled to accept all reasonable allegations set forth in a complaint; however, the Panel may deny relief where a complaint contains mere conclusory or unsubstantiated arguments. See WIPO Jurisprudential Overview 3.0 at ¶ 4.3; see also eGalaxy Multimedia Inc. v. ON HOLD By Owner Ready To Expire, FA 157287 (Forum June 26, 2003) ("Because Complainant did not produce clear evidence to support its subjective allegations [. . .] the Panel finds it appropriate to dismiss the Complaint").
Identical and/or Confusingly Similar
Complainant has shown that it has registered rights in the mark VEO through registrations in several European countries for inter alia "Providing non-downloadable software using AI (artificial intelligence) for creating and generating images, video, audio, and music from text", the earliest being in Austria, namely Reg. No. 328856, registered on November 13, 2024.
Complainant has also shown that, through use and extensive media coverage, it had acquired common law rights in the VEO mark by the time the domain name was registered on May 21, 2025.
The Panel finds Respondent's <veo3-ai.com> domain name to be confusingly similar to Complainant's VEO mark, only differing by the addition of the number "3", a hyphen, and the abbreviation for artificial intelligence "ai", which differences are insufficient to distinguish the domain name from Complainant's VEO mark. The inconsequential ".com" generic top-level domain ("gTLD") may be ignored under this element. See, for example, Rollerblade, Inc. v. Chris McCrady, D2000-0429 (WIPO June 25, 2000).
Complainant has established this element.
Rights or Legitimate Interests
Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides that any of the following circumstances, in particular but without limitation, if found by the Panel to be proved based on its evaluation of all evidence presented, shall demonstrate Respondent's rights or legitimate interests to the domain name for purposes of Paragraph 4(a)(ii):
(i) before any notice to Respondent of the dispute, the use by Respondent of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or
(ii) Respondent (as an individual, business or other organization) has been commonly known by the domain name, even if Respondent has acquired no trademark or service mark rights; or
(iii) Respondent is making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert customers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue.
As noted, the <veo3-ai.com> domain name was registered on May 21, 2025, a year after Complainant launched Veo, more than five months after Complainant launched Veo 2, and one day after Complainant launched Veo 3. It resolves to a website headed: "VEO 3 AI Video & Audio Creation A New Era with Google Veo", followed by:
"Meet Veo3 Al, the latest breakthrough from Google Veo. With veo3 ai, you can generate videos with synchronized sound, dialogue, and music simply from a prompt. Create cinematic scenes, talking characters, and animated effects - all powered by veo3 ai's advanced tracking, native audio, and realistic physics. Integrated with Imagen 4 and Flow, veo 3 Al brings your creative ideas to life. Begin using Veo-3 AI".
These circumstances, together with Complainant's assertions, are sufficient to constitute a prima facie showing of absence of rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name on the part of Respondent. The evidentiary burden therefore shifts to Respondent to show that it does have rights or legitimate interests in the <veo3-ai.com> domain name. See JUUL Labs, Inc. v. Dryx Emerson / KMF Events LTD, FA1906001849706 (Forum July 17, 2019). Respondent has made no attempt to do so.
The Panel finds that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name.
Complainant has established this element.
Registration and Use in Bad Faith
Paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy is expressed in the conjunctive: "the domain name has been registered and is being used in bad faith" and Paragraph 4(b) sets out four illustrative circumstances, which, though not exclusive, shall be evidence of the registration and use of the domain name in bad faith for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii), including:
(iv) by using the domain name, you have intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to your web site or other on-line location, by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of your web site or location or of a product or service on your web site or location.
The circumstances set out above in relation to the second element satisfy the Panel that Respondent was fully aware of Complainant, its VEO mark and its Veo 3 AI-powered video generation offering when Respondent registered the <veo3-ai.com> domain name and that Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to Respondent's website, by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Respondent's website and of the products and services promoted on that website. This demonstrates registration and use in bad faith to attract users for commercial gain under Policy ¶ 4(b)(iv).
As to whether Respondent acted in bad faith by using a privacy protection service to hide its WHOIS registration data, as noted in WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.6, "there are recognized legitimate uses of privacy and proxy registration services", and the circumstances in which such services are used can however impact a panel's assessment of bad faith. As is widely known, the use of a privacy or proxy registration service is a common practice adopted by many legitimate businesses and individuals to protect against spam, identity theft, and other security risks. Absent additional evidence showing that such privacy was employed specifically to conceal wrongful conduct or to prevent a trademark owner from identifying the registrant, the mere use of a privacy service does not in itself support a finding of bad faith.
Here, the Panel finds the structure of the domain name and Respondent's conduct in registering the domain name the day after the launch of Complainant's Veo 3 product support a finding of bad faith use by Respondent of a privacy protection service.
Complainant has established this element.
DECISION
Complainant having established all three elements required under the ICANN Policy, the Panel concludes that relief shall be GRANTED.
Accordingly, it is Ordered that the <veo3-ai.com> domain name be TRANSFERRED from Respondent to Complainant.
Alan L. Limbury, Panelist
Dated: August 26, 2025
Click Here to return to the main Domain Decisions Page.
Click Here to return to our Home Page