Such use cannot possibly be considered a bona fide offering of goods or services as the Respondent is trading on the Complainant’s goodwill to attract internet users to his website/s by creating a false association with the Complainant. See Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847 (“use which intentionally trades on the fame of another cannot constitute a ‘bona fide’ offering of goods or services”), see also Microsoft Corporation v. ...
2016-02-04 - Case Details
Factual Background
CenturyLink Intellectual Property, LLC (“CenturyLink”) is an S&P 500 company and is included among the Fortune 500 list of America’s largest corporations. It provides data, voice and managed services in local, national and select international markets through its fiber optic network and multiple data centers for businesses and consumers. ...
2017-03-16 - Case Details
Obwohl der vorliegende Fall nicht der "Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy ("UDRP") unterliegt, möchte der Experte darauf hinweisen, dass sich die Situation im gegenwärtigen Fall von jener im Madonna-Fall (Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com",
WIPO Case No. D2000-847) unterscheidet, da es dem Beschwerdegegner im letzteren nicht gelang, eine glaubwürdige Erklärung für seine Wahl des Namens "Madonna" als Domainname zu erbringen. ...
2016-02-24 - Case Details
the "Complainant"), a company incorporated under the laws of Jamaica, with its main address at 214 Spanish Town Road, P. O. Box 190, Kingston 11, Jamaica. Complainant’s authorized representative is Paul Cox, S. J. Berwin, 222 Graves Inn Road, London WC1X 8XF, United Kingdom.
...
2002-09-19 - Case Details
The Respondent cannot show a legitimate interest by demonstrating use of the disputed domain name to divert traffic to a web site for or to advertise a prostitution service which has no obvious connection to the disputed domain name.
As stated in Madonna Ciccone p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com"
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847, "use which
intentionally trades on the fame of another can not constitute a ‘bona fide’
offering of goods or services. ...
2002-10-25 - Case Details
The Court concluded
that: "The GALLO brand is universally known both nationally and in California,
and has become an extraordinarily strong and distinctive mark...." (p.
1667). This holding was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit. 967 F.2d 1280 (9th Cir. 1992). ...
2002-04-29 - Case Details
The Complainant, Convergys Inc. is evidently a global leader in outsourced
billing and customer care services, is a member of the S&P 500 and the
Forbes’ Platinum 400, and is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The
Complainant reportedly employs over 45,000 people worldwide and provides
goods and services in more than 30 countries. ...
2002-05-08 - Case Details
A Draft Business Plan (Response Exhibit A) and a printout of the planned website (Response Exhibit P) have been provided to prove these assertions and to demonstrate Respondent’s preparations to use the Domain Name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods and services.
...
2002-04-15 - Case Details
The Panel agrees
with a previous holding that "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 (October 12, 2000), at page 4.
...
2002-04-03 - Case Details
This
registration may implicate third-party trademark rights, as "Hooters"
is a federally registered trademark belonging to Hooter’s, Inc., a Florida corporation.
See Annex P.
*37. Value Holding’s registration and subsequent use of the
domain name constitutes bad faith...
2001-06-08 - Case Details
Richard MacLeod d/b/a For Sale, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0662 at p.4 (September 19, 2002)].
The Panel therefore concludes that the requirement of Paragraph 4(a)(i) of
the Policy is satisfied.
...
2003-05-08 - Case Details
D2000-0163 ("[The domain name] is so obviously connected with
such a well-known product that its very use by someone with no connection with
the product suggests opportunistic bad faith."), p. 5.
The fame and distinctiveness of the Complainant’s Marks has been recognized
in previous matters before this body. ...
2003-07-23 - Case Details
It is also stated on the site that the copyright of the materials thereon belonged to "yesuit.com," ref. Annex P and F to the Complaint.
On June 27, 2003, a further check of the eNom Inc. Whois database showed that the name of Sam Chen again appeared under the name of the Registrant, ref. ...
2003-09-18 - Case Details
Case No. D2000-0449 (August 27, 2000); Gordon Sumner p/k/a Sting v. Michael Urvan, WIPO Case No. D2000-0596,
(July 20, 2000); and Document Technologie, Inc., v. ...
2001-04-25 - Case Details
In fact, on May 15, 2001, the domain name’s registrant and contacts had changed for the benefit of a company Sociedad Batigere, seated #C-2, P G Esc y 103 A Nte, San Salvador, San Salvador 00000 SV."
5. Parties’ Contentions
Complainants and Respondent make the following allegations. ...
2001-07-31 - Case Details
On July 12, 2000, and August 7, 2000, Complainant (through its counsel) sent via Federal Express to Respondent a cease and desist and transfer demand with respect to the disputed domain names (Complaint, Annexes P & Q).
By letter of August 14, 2000, Respondent replied to Complainant’s demand, indicating that it would either sell the rights to use the disputed domain names to Complainant, or continue to use them (id., Annex R).
...
2001-01-23 - Case Details
On April 6, 2000 and May 5, 2000, Complainant (through its counsel) sent via Federal Express to Respondent a cease and desist and transfer demand with respect to the disputed domain names (Complaint, Annexes O & P). Respondent did not reply to such correspondence (id, paragraph 12).
The Service Agreement in effect between Respondent and Network Solutions subjects Respondent to Network Solutions’ dispute settlement policy, the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, as adopted by ICANN on August 26, 1999, and with implementing documents approved by ICANN on October 24, 1999. ...
2001-01-23 - Case Details
The Parties
The Complainant is ADT Services AG, a Swiss corporation with its principal place of business at Shaffhausen, Switzerland. The Complainant is represented by Mr John P. Margiotta, of Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu P.C., Attorneys of New York, USA.
The Respondent is ADT Sucks.com of Box 4357, Boynton Beach, Florida, USA. ...
2001-04-26 - Case Details
In its complaint the Complainant elected to have the dispute decided by a single-member Administrative Panel and in the event the Respondent designated a three-member Administrative Panel the Complainant nominated Mr. David P. Plant, Mr. Geert Glas and Professor Charles Gielen as its candidates to the Administrative Panel. ...
2001-02-12 - Case Details
IRG Coins and Ink Source, Inc., WIPO Case
No. D2000-0090; Stralfors AB v. P D S AB, WIPO Case No. D2000-0112;
InfoSpace.com, Inc. v. Ofer, WIPO Case No. D2000-0075.
To quote a prior Panel
decision, "[B]ecause Respondent is contributing no value-added to the Internet
-- it is merely attempting to exploit a general rule of registration -- the
broad community of Internet users will be better served by transferring the
domain name to a party with a legitimate use for it." ...
2001-03-22 - Case Details