Thus, it appears to this Panel that Respondent is simply
trading on Complainant's fame and reputation for Respondent's own purposes,
and Respondent's use cannot constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services.
See Madonna Ciccone p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and Madonna.com, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0847 (October 12, 2000).
6.11 Respecting item (ii) of Paragraph 6.7 above, Respondent, having defaulted regarding a response, there is no evidence that Respondent has ever been commonly known by the disputed domain names.
6.12 In the strictest sense, Respondent has used the disputed domain names for its own purposes. ...
2003-11-06 - Case Details
The Respondents are Dave Lahoti and Interspectrum, giving an address in Tustin, California, United States of America, represented by The Law Offices of Brett P. Wakino, United States of America.
2. The Domain Names and Registrar
The disputed domain names and are registered with Tucows, Inc. ...
2003-12-19 - Case Details
WIPO Arbitration and
Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL
DECISION
Panavision, Inc. and Panavision International, L. P. v. Ed Meyer, d/b/a/ Panavisions Eyewear and Sunglasses, Domains by Proxy, Inc., and M.P.W., Inc. d/b/a Panavisions Eyewear and Sunglasses, Inc.
...
2004-03-22 - Case Details
In view of all of the above, Complainant claims that the evidence establishes sufficient facts to support a finding that the Domain Name was registered and is used in bad faith pursuant to the Policy paragraph 4(a)(iii)." (Complaint, p. 10-11).
Taking all of these criteria into account and also that the Respondent has chosen not to respond to the Complaint, the Panel finds that the Complainant has succeeded in showing evidence of registration and use in bad faith.
7. ...
2004-03-25 - Case Details
Corp., NAF Case No. 93668 wherein it was found that use of Complainant’s mark "as a portal to suck surfers into a site sponsored by Respondent hardly seems legitimate."
Moreover, in Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com"
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847, the panel observed
that, "use which intentionally trades on the fame of another can not constitute
a bona fide offering of goods or services. ...
2004-04-14 - Case Details
Other sponsored links on the Respondent’s Website referred users to places like a website hosted by the Los Angeles Film School to advertise educational services in the field of three dimensional animation and websites offering consulting services related to SolidWorks® software (see Handler Declaration, Exhibits O-P).
The Complainant received no response to its initial communication sent to the Respondent (see Handler Declaration). ...To conclude otherwise would mean that a Respondent could rely on intentional infringement to demonstrate a legitimate interest, an interpretation which is obviously contrary to the intent of the Policy.” See Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847; see also F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG v. ...
2012-02-20 - Case Details
WIPO Overview 3.0, section 1.10, provides guidance addressing the question, “[h]ow
are trademark registrations with design elements or disclaimed text treated in assessing identity or confusing
similarity?” Section 1.10 states in relevant part that “[p]anel assessment of identity or confusing similarity
involves comparing the (alpha-numeric) domain name and the textual components of the relevant mark. ...And
Respondent has emphasized that its website does not copy the look and feel of Complainant’s site, nor does
Respondent’s logo design (see below) copy the design of Complainant’s marks:
Normally, “[p]anels tend to assess claimed respondent rights or legitimate interests in the present, i.e., with a
view to the circumstances prevailing at the time of the filing of the complaint.” ...
2024-03-11 - Case Details
The Complainant strongly demands the disputed domain name for a website dedicated to Arabic speakers. This is strange as there is no letter “p” in the Arabic alphabet. The logo for is written as “banet” which means that, if rights exist, these are for “banet” and not “panet”.
...However, it notes that an Arabic version of the Complainant’s logo transliterates as “banet” and that there is no letter “p” in the Arabic alphabet. Even if this is so, the Panel notes that the Complainant has chosen to register and use the word PANET, in Latin and not Arabic script, for its trademark. ...
2021-11-15 - Case Details
At some point after December 6, 2021, the following text was added to the home page of the website: “We
are not an Apparel Company. We do not sell athletic apparel. [P]lease do not email us about sales. We
recommend www.underarmour.com or www.Nike.com for your apparel needs.”
...At some point after December 6, 2021, the following text was added to the home page of the website: “We are not an Apparel Company. We do not sell athletic apparel. [P]lease do not email us about sales. We recommend www.underarmour.com or www.Nike....
The following communications took place by email and phone between December 10, 2021, and January 14, 2022:
- The Complainant’s agent approached the Registrant through the Registrar enquiring about potential acquisition of the disputed domain name on behalf of its undisclosed client...
2022-08-11 - Case Details
Hamco Alabama, LLC,
WIPO Case No. D2011-1451 (“The [p]anel declines to rule on this element of the Policy, since the [p]anel finds (below) that the [d]omain [n]ame was not registered and is not being used in bad faith”).
...
2017-12-01 - Case Details
投诉人认为，被投诉人是在恶意的情况下注册和使用争议域名的。
B. 被投诉人
被投诉人主张，BPM是英文字母B、P、M的简单拼凑，和ABC、XYZ无异，不具有显著性。投诉人是一家区域性公司，在意大利以外的国家和地区（包括中国）没有开展业务，也没有注册商标，其商标并非世界驰名商标。
被投诉人主张，域名持有人拥有在先注册权利；并拥有"banco bpm"商标权、域名所有权等合法权益。...本案中，被投诉人未提出任何有力证据主张其在注册争议域名时不知道投诉人上述商标的存在。被投诉人在答辩书中主张，BPM是英文字母B、P、M的简单拼凑，和ABC、XYZ无异，不具有显著性；"BPM"有无数种解释，可以是很多术语的缩写，如Business Process Management的缩写（即业务流程管理）、BPM－Beast Per Minute 的缩写（即每一分钟的节拍数量）等。...
2017-01-03 - Case Details
Westminster Window and General Cleaners Ltd. (1946) 63 RPC 39, at p 42, per Lord Simonds). As his Lordship said (1946) 63 RPC, at p 43, the possibility of blunders by members of the public will always be present when names consist of descriptive words - "So long as descriptive words are used by two traders as part of their respective trade names, it is possible that some members of the public will be confused whatever the differentiating words may be." ...
2003-05-02 - Case Details
Not every prior use to in domain name disputes constitutes a bona-fide use: Madonna Ciccone p/k/a v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com",
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847. Whether the Respondent had adopted the trademark and business name in good faith as an honest adopter may involve complex issues of fact, and the Policy may not in all such cases be the most appropriate forum for evaluating such issues. ...The mere registration or ownership of trademarks by the Respondent does not of itself necessarily confer legitimate interests under the Policy. See Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com",
WIPO Case No. D2009-0847. The overall circumstances should demonstrate that the domain name was registered in good faith for the purpose of making bona fide use of the mark in the jurisdiction where the mark is registered. ...
2009-08-11 - Case Details
Buffalo Wu, CA-00-00178-A (memorandum decision at p. 8)
Twenty-two UDRP decisions
involving the Complainant’s mark have been issued by WIPO Panels, all of which
have required the transfer of all involved domain names to the Complainant.
...s mark except for the addition of two non-distinguishing
letters, ‘p’ and ‘s,’ to the end of the YAHOO! mark. Because the Domain Name
fully incorporates the YAHOO! mark, and because the pronunciation of ‘yahoops’
is virtually identical to the pronunciation of ‘yahoo,’ Internet users could
easily confuse the two names."
...
2002-07-08 - Case Details
Indeed, the formal letter seeking undertakings from the Complainants’ representatives, W P Thompson and Co, dated February 27, 2002, says it is sent on behalf of the First Complainant. It would appear to the Respondent, however, that such trade mark registrations as are annexed to the Complaint are all in the name of the Second Complainant.
...However, The Respondent contends that the response on behalf of the First Complainant through its patent attorney, W P Thompson and Co dated February 27, 2002, failed to deal with any of the issues raised in the letter of February 19, 2002, and offered a "take it or leave it" £220, representing what that firm considered to be the "direct costs" of registering and maintaining the domain names. ...
2002-06-03 - Case Details
Que “… como va a haber mala fe, si en esa época, no EXISTÍA nada de TV Azteca en Digital”, información visible en http://www.google.com.mx/#hl=es&xhr=t&q=azteca+digital&cp=8&pf=p&sclient=psy&aq=0s&aqi=&aql=&oq=aztecadi&pbx=1&fp=ff2546a75a739a93 y http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Televisi%C3%B3n_de_alta_definici%C3%B3n#M.C3.A9xico.
...
2011-03-14 - Case Details
Even on its company letter head used in its email and post communication of January 20, 2011 (p. 132 in the case file), the Respondent does only refer to as its official company domain name.
...
2011-03-29 - Case Details
TDS Holdings,
WIPO Case No. D2010-1422, citing Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com",
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847. Further, the Panel endorses the conclusion expressed in World Natural Bodybuilding Federation, Inc. v. ...
2011-07-18 - Case Details
D2008-0090 and Panavision, Inc., Panavision International, L. P. v. Roomwithnet Systems (I) P.Ltd./ Eyecircus Studio Pvt.Ltd,
WIPO Case No. D2005-0521, (finding that adding or removing letters to or from a trademark is not sufficient to escape the finding of similarity and does not change the impression of the trademark being connected with the complainant). ...
2011-07-13 - Case Details
“Use which intentionally trades on the fame of another cannot constitute a bona fide offering of goods or services”: Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847 ().
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the Domain Names.
...
2013-02-20 - Case Details