Thomas McCarthy,
McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition (4th ed. 2005) §31:10,
p. 31-35 and cases cited therein (in common law, the defense of laches bars
the recovery of damages incurred before the filing of a lawsuit; this is not
apposite to injunctive relief in a trademark action that seeks to avoid confusion
among customers in the future).
...
2005-10-17 - Case Details
It is well-established that “use
which intentionally trades on the fame of another 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); Delta Corporate Identity, Inc.
...
2005-09-22 - 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. ...
2004-02-06 - Case Details
Peter Carrington,
WIPO Case No. D2002-0846, October 31, 2002;
or that [p]ersons dealing with, or even perusing the website of [,
and/or ] could easily conclude
that the registrant of the domain name was associated with Wal-Mart’s operation[…]
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...
2002-12-23 - Case Details
Still the user is invited to
call the Respondent (not the second Respondent) for information on "development"
(i.e. sale, cf. Complaint, p. 14) of the domain name. The only significant change
is the removal of the pop-up screens (Annex 21). ...
2002-06-14 - Case Details
Section 4.6 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 states inter alia “Unsolicited supplemental filings are generally discouraged, unless specifically requested by the panel…. [P]anels have repeatedly affirmed that the party submitting or requesting to submit an unsolicited supplemental filing should clearly show its relevance to the case and why it was unable to provide the information contained therein in its complaint or response. ...
2021-07-27 - Case Details
The Complainant’s later registered trademarks are each for the same DIAMOND POINT device
consisting of capitalized letters set out so that the letter “D” surrounds the letter “P”, both of these being in a
grey colored stylized typeface, above the capitalized words DIAMOND POINT, each in a purple colored
stylized typeface. ...
2024-11-05 - Case Details
When considering
whether the filing of trademark application or registration of a trademark evidences the existence of a
legitimate interest, the following circumstances should be taken into account (see Fonbet Corp. v. Gennadiy
P. Pastushenko, WIPO Case DUA2020-0020):
(i) when considering the issue of ‘rights or legitimate interests’ under paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the .UA Policy, the
panel may, where appropriate, question the legitimacy of the trademark referred to by the respondent. ...
2024-08-27 - Case Details
The Respondent is Michael Eymer, United States of America (“Respondent”), represented by
Thomas P. Howard LLC, United States of America.
2. The Domain Name and Registrar
The disputed domain name is registered with GoDaddy.com, LLC (the “Registrar”).
3. ...
2025-09-30 - Case Details
As to the Respondent’s registered Australian trademark (No. 2351633 BEAUTY IN & OUT BY NEW
NORDIC) and pending EUTM Application No. 019000462, the Panel notes that a trademark registration
relied upon by a respondent does not support a claim for rights or legitimate interests if the overall
circumstances demonstrate that the registration was not obtained for a bona fide purpose, but rather to
bolster a domain name registration: see Madonna Ciccone p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and Madonna.com,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847; BECA Inc. v. CanAm Health Source Inc., WIPO Case No. ...
2026-05-22 - Case Details
Complainant’s shares began trading
publicly on the New York Stock Exchange on May 10, 2019 (symbol: UBER) and it joined the S&P 500 in
December 2023.
Pursuant to provisions in Complainant’s most recent Annual Report, submitted as evidence in the Annexes
to the Complaint, as of the year ending December 31, 2024, Complainant and its subsidiaries had
approximately 31,000 employees globally, operations in more than 15,000 cities around the world, 171
million monthly active platform consumers and revenue of USD 43.978 billion.
...
2025-05-19 - Case Details
Screenshots of the app,
have been annexed as Annexure P.
- The Complainant claims that by virtue of such continuous and exclusive use since at least 1956 as well as
the promotion of the KHADI trademarks by the Complainant, general public and members of trade recognize
and associate the goods and services under the KHADI trademarks with the Complainant and none other.
...
2022-06-29 - Case Details
In relation to the Respondent’s assertion that “kubota” is a generic term, section 2.10.1 of the WIPO
Overview 3.0 indicates that “[p]anels have recognized that merely registering a domain name comprised of a
dictionary word or phrase does not by itself automatically confer rights or legitimate interests on the
respondent; panels have held that mere arguments that a domain name corresponds to a dictionary
term/phrase will not necessarily suffice. ...
2022-12-05 - Case Details
En todos esos casos, los grupos de expertos has afirmado repetidamente que la parte que hace una presentación adicional no solicitada, o que solicita presentarla, debería demostrar claramente su relevancia para el caso y por qué no pudo proporcionar la información allí contenida en su demanda p contestación a la demanda (p.ej., debido a alguna circunstancia “excepcional”)”).1
El Experto considera que la presentación adicional de la Demandante no contiene elementos que no pudieran haber sido incorporados en la Demanda. ...
2018-09-25 - Case Details
With respect to unsolicited filings, this Panel is of the view expressed in Gordon Sumner, p/k/a Sting v. Michael Urvan,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0596, that unsolicited submissions will be considered only in exceptional circumstances, and only when the party filing the unsolicited submission explains the exceptional circumstances and why the material could not have been submitted with the Complaint.
...
2018-11-12 - Case Details
Here, the dominant feature of Complainant’s Marks is “mobius.” See, e.g., Cameron Thomaz p/k/a Wiz Khalifa and Wiz Khalifa Trademark, LLC v. Anthony Lynch and Anthony ceo,
WIPO Case No. D2015-0166 (finding domain names containing the word “taylor” but not “gang” confusingly similar to the trademark TAYLOR GANG where “Complainant has alleged that ‘taylor’ is the dominant portion of the TAYLOR GANG trademark, and that Respondent has incorporated this dominant portion of the trademark into the disputed domain names”); La Quinta Worldwide L.L.C. v. ...
2018-09-28 - Case Details
Because I don’t understand all of this, I feel the urge to keep mailing back when you mail me something about a receipt and passing to a panel.Sorry. Panel. FirstCap P. Who is in the Panel? How many men/woman? What do they do for their living? I hope they do not ‘just’ think the word ‘SEX’ is a problem, because all people stand on this earth BECAUSE of sex. ...
2007-12-21 - Case Details
The Complainant's wholly-owned subsidiary Automobili Lamborghini S. p. A. manufactures the automobiles. The vehicles of the Complainant belong to the world's most famous luxury sports cars.
...
2009-08-03 - Case Details
Second Orbit Communications, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0867; Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847; Nik Carter v. The Afternoon Fiasco,
WIPO Case No. ...
2009-11-16 - Case Details
Second Orbit Communications,
Inc., WIPO Case No. D2000-0867; Madonna
Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com", WIPO
Case No. D2000-0847; Nik Carter v. The Afternoon Fiasco, WIPO
Case No. ...
2005-11-16 - Case Details