The Complainant, Loro Piana S.p.A., is an Italian luxury fashion brand headquartered in Milan and specialised in textile manufacturing and ready-to-wear clothing. Founded in 1924, the company is widely recognised as one of the world’s largest manufacturers of cashmere and a leading artisan company processing luxury fibre.<\/p>\n
Over the decades, the Complainant has expanded its activities from textile production to luxury goods, including knitwear, footwear, leather goods and accessories. The brand has a global presence with approximately 145 retail stores worldwide and distributes its products across Europe, North America, the Middle East and Asia.<\/p>\n
The trademark LORO PIANA enjoys a significant reputation and has been recognised as a well-known trademark in previous UDRP decisions.<\/p>\n
The disputed domain names:<\/p>\n
<loropiana-discounts.shop><\/p>\n<\/li>\n
<loropiana-online.com><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
were registered by the Respondent on 24 September 2025.<\/p>\n
At the time of the decision, the disputed domain names resolve to inactive websites.
No information is available about the Respondent.<\/p>",
"other_legal_proceedings": "
The Panel is not aware of any other legal proceedings which are pending or decided and which relate to the disputed domain names.<\/p>", "no_response_filed": "
The Complainant submits that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to its LORO PIANA trademarks.<\/span><\/p>\n The disputed domain names incorporate the Complainant’s trademark in its entirety, with the only additions being the descriptive terms “discounts” and “online”, separated by a hyphen.<\/span><\/p>\n According to the Complainant, such additions do not prevent a finding of confusing similarity and may even increase the likelihood of confusion, as Internet users may believe the domain names refer to an official website offering discounted or online products of the Complainant.<\/span><\/p>\n The Complainant contends that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names.<\/span><\/p>\n In particular:<\/span><\/p>\n the Respondent has no relationship with the Complainant;<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n the Respondent has never been authorised to use the LORO PIANA trademark;<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n the Respondent is not commonly known by the disputed domain names;<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n the Respondent has not demonstrated any bona fide use of the domain names.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n The disputed domain names are currently inactive, and considering their incorporation of the well-known trademark LORO PIANA, it is difficult to conceive any legitimate use.<\/span><\/p>\n The Complainant argues that the disputed domain names were registered and are being used in bad faith.<\/span><\/p>\n The Complainant submits that:<\/span><\/p>\n the trademark LORO PIANA is widely known worldwide;<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n the Respondent could not reasonably have been unaware of the Complainant’s rights at the time of registration;<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n the term “Loro Piana” is distinctive and corresponds to the name of the founder of the company.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n The Complainant further argues that the Respondent is passively holding the disputed domain names, which may constitute bad faith use according to established UDRP case law (notably Telstra Corporation Limited v. Nuclear Marshmallows<\/em>).<\/span><\/p>\n The Respondent did not submit any response to the Complaint.<\/span><\/p>",
"rights": " The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy).<\/p>",
"no_rights_or_legitimate_interests": " The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the Respondent to have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain names (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy).<\/p>",
"bad_faith": " The Complainant has, to the satisfaction of the Panel, shown the disputed domain names have been registered and are being used in bad faith (within the meaning of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy).<\/p>",
"procedural_factors": " The Panel is satisfied that all procedural requirements under UDRP were met and there is no other reason why it would be inappropriate to provide a decision.<\/p>",
"decision": "Accepted",
"panelists": [
"Hana Císlerová"
],
"date_of_panel_decision": "2026-03-06 00:00:00",
"informal_english_translation": " The Complainant owns several trademarks consisting of or including the word element “LORO PIANA”.<\/p>\n Some of the most relevant trademarks are as follows:<\/p>\n • International trademark registration No. 578976 “LORO PIANA” (word), registered on November 13, 1991, in classes 23, 24 and 25;<\/p>\n • EU trademark registration No. 007383136 “LORO PIANA” (device), filed on November 11, 2008, registered on June 9, 2009, in classes 9, 14 and 35;<\/p>\n • International trademark registration No. 1546962 “LORO PIANA” (device), registered on May 22, 2020, in class 25, designating, inter alia, the United States.<\/p>\n The Complainant is also the owner of the domain name <loropiana.com>, registered on September 14, 2001, which resolves to the Complainant’s official website.<\/p>",
"decision_domains": {
"loropiana-discounts.shop": "TRANSFERRED",
"loropiana-online.com": "TRANSFERRED"
},
"panelist": null,
"panellists_text": null
}No rights or legitimate interests<\/span><\/h3>\n
\n
Registered and used in bad faith<\/span><\/h3>\n
\n
Respondent:<\/span><\/h2>\n