Newsweekng.com

The timeline behind newsweekng.com

Registration, the decision and the archived record of what this domain actually displayed — from public RDAP and the Internet Archive.

Result of record. The panel's reasoning and decisive facts behind each element are in the Intelligence dossier below.

ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION CENTER ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Newsweek Publishing LLC v. Grace Jackson, Ejes Gist Media Limited Case No. D2026-3339 1. The Parties Complainant is Newsweek Publishing LLC, United States of America (“United States”), internally represented. Respondent is Grace Jackson, Ejes Gist Media Limited, United States. 2. The Domain Name and Registrar The disputed domain name <newsweekng.com> is registered with CloudFlare, Inc. (the “Registrar”). 3. Procedural History The Complaint was filed with the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center (the “Center”) on July 28, 2026. On July 29, 2026, the Center transmitted by email to the Registrar a request for registrar verification in connection with the disputed domain name. On July 29, 2026, the Registrar transmitted by email to the Center its verification response disclosing registrant and contact information for the disputed domain name which differed from the named Respondent (News Week Nigeria / DATA REDACTED) and contact information in the Complaint. The Center sent an email communication to Complainant on July 30, 2026, providing the registrant and contact information disclosed by the Registrar, and inviting Complainant to submit an amendment to the Complaint. Complainant filed an amendment to the Complaint on August 5, 2026. The Center verified that the Complaint together with the amendment to the Complaint satisfied the formal requirements of the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Policy” or “UDRP”), the Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Rules”), and the WIPO Supplemental Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (the “Supplemental Rules”). In accordance with the Rules, paragraphs 2 and 4, the Center formally notified Respondent of the Complaint, and the proceedings commenced on August 11, 2026. In accordance with the Rules, paragraph 5, the due date for Response was August 31, 2026. Response was filed with the Center on August 11, 2026. The Center appointed Georges Nahitchevansky as the sole panelist in this matter on August 31, 2026. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with the Rules, paragraph 7. page 2 4. Factual Background Complainant, Newsweek Publishing LLC, is a print and online news service based in New York City, United States. Complainant owns and uses the mark NEWSWEEK in connection with its news service and owns trademark registrations for stylized versions of the NEWSWEEK mark in the United States (Registration Nos. 1,413,355; 2,000,346; and 2,418,759) the earliest of which issued to registration on September 10, 1996. Complainant also owns a registration for the mark NEWSWEEK.COM (Registration No. 2,418,759) that issued to registration on January 9, 2001; this was later amended to a stylized version of the NEWSWEEK mark. Lastly, Complainant owns and uses the domain name <newsweek.com> for an online version of its news service. Respondent appears to be based in the United States in the State of Maryland, although Respondent’s organization, Ejes Gist Media Limited, appears to be a Nigerian company incorporated in Nigeria. Respondent registered the disputed domain name on December 9, 2022 and has used such for a digital news publication that publishes news articles and content primarily related to Nigeria. That use continues to this day. 5. Parties’ Contentions A. Complainant Complainant contends that it has satisfied each of the elements required under the Policy for a transfer or cancellation of the disputed domain name. Complainant maintains that it owns rights in the NEWSWEEK mark by virtue of its trademark registrations for the NEWSWEEK mark in the United States. Complainant also asserts that its NEWSWEEK mark is famous and enjoys an “international reputation.” Complainant asserts that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar as it fully incorporates the NEWSWEEK mark with the non-distinguishing country code for Nigeria. Complainant contends that Respondent does not have legitimate interests in the disputed domain name as Respondent (i) is not making a bona fide offering of good and services since Respondent is using the disputed domain name, based on the famous NEWSWEEK mark, to lure web traffic to Respondent’s website for ad revenue generation, (ii) is not commonly known by the disputed domain name, and (iii) is not making a legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the disputed domain name. In that regard, Complainant notes that the disputed domain name carries a high risk of implied affiliation as it impersonates the NEWSWEEK mark and has been used for commercial purposes. Complainant also notes that Respondent’s website at the disputed domain name has used a masthead header graphic “which replicates the unique stylized lettering and distinct white-text-on-red rectangle representation of the Complainant’s registered NEWSWEEK trademark layout” and included in a footer “a nonexistent corporate persona to assert a copyright interest in the Complainant’s exact trademark” (“© 2026 New Week Nigeria. All Rights Reserved”). Lastly, Complainant maintains that Respondent registered and has used the disputed domain name in bad faith. Complainant argues that because the NEWSWEEK mark enjoys an international reputation, and given Respondent’s use of a masthead on Respondent’s website at the disputed domain name that mimics Complainant’s mark, Respondent had actual knowledge of Complainant’s mark when it registered the disputed domain name and then used such for its digital news platform for Respondent’s commercial gain. Complainant also argues that Respondent’s operations harm its NEWSWEEK mark as it is impersonating and passing off its digital news platform as connected to Complainant and publishing content that is “sensitive or unverified.” page 3 B. Respondent The Response was filed on behalf of Ejes Gist Media Limited by an individual O. D. claiming to be “Editor/Publisher”. The Response has been received from the email address associated with the registration record for the disputed domain name. Respondent rejects Complainant’s contentions. Respondent contends that it operates a legitimate “Nigerian digital news publication and has continuously published original editorial content through the disputed domain name since 2022.” Respondent asserts that its company, Ejes Gist Media Limited, was incorporated in Nigeria in 2022 and that it has obtained approval for the business name “News Week Nigeria Media” through the Nigerian Corporate Affairs Commisssion. Respondent does not contest that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar for purposes of the first element only. Respondent asserts that it has acted legitimately as Respondent (i) publishes original, genuine news content on its website for a Nigerian audience, and has done so for many years, (ii) has never attempted to sell the disputed domain name to or otherwise seek payment from Complainant, (iii) has no pattern of registering domain names corresponding to third party trademarks, and (i) has not used the disputed domain name to redirect web traffic to competitors of Complainant. Respondent maintains that its actions establish Respondent’s good faith. Respondent notes that after “becoming aware of the Complainant’s concerns, [it] took practical measures to reduce any potential confusion.” Respondent notes that it removed the “white-on-red logo objected to by the Complainant” and adopted “a new, distinct logo” and added a disclaimer to its website advising that Respondent is not affiliated with Complainant. Respondent also notes that (i) its website is geographically focused on Nigerian news and geared to Nigerian readers and thus operates within a distinct geographic market and (ii) the disputed domain name “combines the generic terms ‘news’ and ‘week’ with the geographic identifier ‘NG’ (Nigeria)” – which Respondent asserts clearly signals a Nigerian publication and not a United Stated based publication. Lastly, Respondent contends that “media organizations frequently use descriptive terms together with geographic identifiers to distinguish publications serving different regions and audiences.” In that regard, Respondent provides examples of United Kingdom publications such as The Guardian, Independent, and Daily Post that operate in the United Kingdom that coexist with unrelated publications by the same name in Nigeria. 6. Discussion and Findings Under paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, to succeed Complainant must satisfy the Panel that: (i) the disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which Complainant has rights; (ii) Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name; and (iii) the disputed domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. A. Identical or Confusingly Similar Here, Respondent does not contest that for purposes of the first element the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to Complainant’s claimed NEWSWEEK trademark as it consists of “newsweek.” As such, the Panel finds for Complainant on the first element. page 4 B. Rights or Legitimate Interests Paragraph 4(c) of the Policy provides a list of circumstances in which a respondent may demonstrate rights or legitimate interests in a disputed domain name. Although the overall burden of proof in UDRP proceedings is on the complainant, panels have recognized that proving a respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests in a domain name may result in the difficult task of “proving a negative”, requiring information that is often primarily within the knowledge or control of the respondent. As such, where a complainant makes out a prima facie case that the respondent lacks rights or legitimate interests, the burden of production on this element shifts to the respondent to come forward with relevant evidence demonstrating rights or legitimate interests in the domain name (although the burden of proof always remains on the complainant). If the respondent fails to come forward with such relevant evidence, the complainant is deemed to have satisfied the second element. WIPO Overview of WIPO Panel Views on Select UDRP Questions (“WIPO Overview 3.1”) at section 2.1. Here, Complainant has established that it owns rights in the NEWSWEEK mark in the United States, but has provided no evidence of any rights in the NEWSWEEK mark in Nigeria. In addition, while Complainant maintains that it is famous and has an international reputation, Complainant provided no evidence supporting such contention. Thus, the question before the Panel is whether the use of the disputed domain name that combines the terms “news” and “week” with a geographic indicator for Nigeria (“ng”) for a website that provides news in English for ostensibly a Nigerian audience is legitimate, as Respondent contends. To begin, while Respondent maintains that its company, Ejes Gist Media Limited, is incorporated and based in Nigeria, the disputed domain name is registered under the name of Respondent and its company using an address in the United States in the State of Maryland. Respondent does not address this issue. Thus, on its face, notwithstanding Respondent’s claimed Nigerian company, Respondent’s silence on this discrepancy suggests that Respondent is based in the United States and, in fact, operates its claimed news platform out of the United States. This is telling because while Respondent could conceivably develop legitimate rights in the name “News Week” in Nigeria for a news publication, assuming that Complainant has no trademark rights or trans-border reputation in Nigeria, the fact that Respondent appears to be based in the United States puts into question the legitimacy of Respondent’s actions of registering the disputed domain name that is based on the NEWSWEEK mark to offer an online news service – the very service that Complainant offers under its NEWSWEEK mark and through its online platform at the domain name <newsweek.com>. 1 Underscoring that Respondent was likely aware of Complainant and its NEWSWEEK mark and service when Respondent registered and set up its news website is the fact that Respondent initially (and up until recently) used on the masthead of its website an almost identical rendition of the NEWSWEEK mark in the same font and style with a white on red rendition. While Respondent maintains that because it provides original news content for a Nigerian audience its actions are legitimate, that in and of itself does not insulate Respondent and make its actions legitimate. By essentially using the disputed domain name, a “.com” domain name that is based on the NEWSWEEK mark, with a logo on Respondent’s website that mirrored Complainant’s logo, it is more likely than not that Respondent’s intent was to piggyback on Complainant’s mark to attract broad web traffic to Respondent’s website for Respondent’s commercial benefit. Indeed, it is likely that consumers seeing the disputed domain name and associated website probably would conclude that the disputed domain name and associated website are operated or authorized by Complainant for a Nigerian focused NEWSWEEK edition. That Respondent subsequently (and recently) changed its logo and included a disclaimer after receiving the UDRP Complaint does not render Respondent’s actions as being legitimate. Nor does Respondent’s fairly recent application in Nigeria for a trade name for “News Week Nigeria” make Respondent’s actions legitimate. In total, these steps now being taken by Respondent underscore that such actions have been taken in a post hoc attempt to legitimize Respondent’s use of the NEWSWEEK mark for identical services for Respondent’s commercial benefit. 1 While Complainant did not provide evidence regarding the alleged fame or notoriety of the NEWSWEEK mark and associated publications, a simple Google search would have quickly revealed the extent of use of the NEWSWEEK mark for a print and digital news magazine, particularly in the United States where Respondent appears to be based. page 5 With regard to Respondent’s argument that its actions are legitimate because there are coexisting news organizations in Nigeria that use names that are identical to those of media organizations in the United Kingdom, such as The Guardian and the Independent, that argument is of no import. First, there is no evidence on whether these are uses by the same media organizations in the United Kingdom or permitted uses for Nigeria. Second, it is not clear whether these are uses of marks where the parties doing so either have established trademark rights in Nigeria or are infringing the marks of others by launching Nigerian focused digital platforms using the brands of established publications. Third, whether these third party uses are legitimate or not does not change the fact that Respondent is using the NEWSWEEK mark for its own commercial benefit, to offer a competing online news service. To argue otherwise would simply support an absurd result that any party using the brand of another could justify its actions by pointing to coexisting uses of third party brands that may not be legitimate. Lastly, the examples cited by Respondent all use domain names with the country code Top Level Domain (“ccTLD”) “.ng” for Nigeria as opposed to a generic Top Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.com”, as is the case for the disputed domain name. To be sure, the “.com” gTLD is the most recognized Top Level Domain globally and is often used for international appeal as it does not tie a brand to a specific country or local region. This last point is telling as Respondent’s registration of the disputed domain name, a “.com” domain name, is more likely to attract web users around the world (including the United States) and thus more likely to be seen as a NEWSWEEK related website operated, connected or authorized by Complainant for news in Nigeria. For all of the reasons set forth above, the Panel finds the second element of the Policy has been established. C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith The Panel notes that, for purposes of paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy, paragraph 4(b) of the Policy establishes circumstances, in particular, but without limitation, that, if found by the Panel to be present, shall be evidence of the registration and use of a domain name in bad faith. In the present case, the Panel notes that Respondent registered the disputed domain name that includes the full NEWSWEEK mark with the “ng” abbreviation for Nigeria well after Complainant had established rights in its NEWSWEEK mark for a news service both in print and online. That Respondent then used the disputed domain name with a website that featured in its masthead a close proximity of Complainant’s mark and logo with the same font, style and white on red color scheme for its online news service suggests in and of itself that Respondent was well aware of Complainant and its news service when Respondent registered the disputed domain name. Such actions do not seem accidental or undertaken in good faith, but underscore that Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name, which is likely to be seen as connected to Complainant to attract web users to Respondent’s website. Such actions, as already noted above, make it more likely than not that Respondent has acted opportunistically and in bad faith for the profit of Respondent. The Panel finds that Complainant has established the third element of the Policy. 7. Decision For the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the disputed domain name <newsweekng.com> be cancelled. /Georges Nahitchevansky/ Georges Nahitchevansky Sole Panelist Date: September 14, 2026

Source of record: WIPO . Reproduced for research; WIPO is the authoritative source.