But the fact that a term may be commonly used as a descriptor of one concept or thing, does not mean that it is generic or descriptive when applied to some completely unrelated concept or thing. To take a simple example, the expression “apple” would be instantly recognized by English language speakers around the world as descriptive of the fruit of that name. ...
2008-02-21 - Case Details
Complainant states that as held in a similar case by an earlier UDRP panel: “[w]here, [...] they are trademarks, even though they may also be generic in a different context from that for which they are registered and/or used (for example the term ‘apple’ should it be used in with respect to a web site offering fruit, namely apples, is in all likelihood, generic), nevertheless, given the reputation of those marks in another field with which the mark is associated... the intentional registration [...] clearly manifests an intent to capitalize on the mark and constitutes bad faith under the Policy, National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues, Inc., d/b/a Minor League Baseball v. ...
2010-12-13 - Case Details
Moreover, buying and selling domain names is not, in and of itself, evidence of bad faith, a principle now firmly entrenched in many decisions rendered made under the UDRP: see e.g. Apple Computer, Inc. v. DomainHouse.com, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0341; N.C.P. Marketing Group v. Entredomains,
WIPO Case No. ...
2007-11-26 - Case Details
Such use cannot constitute a bona fide offering of goods of services (see The Coryn Group, Inc., Apple Vacations West, Inc. v. V.S. International,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0664).
The Complainant has presented a strong prima facie case indicating that the Respondent does not have any rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain names. ...
2010-01-26 - Case Details