The Parties
Complainant is Emeshel, LLC of Miami, Florida, United States of America, represented by the law firm GrayRobinson. P. A., United States of America.
Respondent is DomRegistrar.com of Great Neck, New York, United States of America, represented by the law firm Lewis & Lin, LLC, United States of America.
2. ...
2011-11-18 - Case Details
Besides, the Panel finds it likely that the Respondent intentionally registered and uses the Domain Names in an attempt to capitalize on the fame of the trademark SWAROVSKI, which shall not be deemed as bona fide. See Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisis 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”).
...
2012-07-26 - Case Details
Complainant has the burden to prove each of these elements by a preponderance of the evidence. See Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com",
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847.
A. Complainant’s Supplemental Filing
Before turning to the merits, the Panel will address the matter of Complainant’s supplemental filing, which was submitted on June 26, 2012. ...
2012-07-19 - Case Details
Further, on the basis of the Panel's findings of bad faith on the part of the Respondent (as detailed below), the Panel finds that the Respondent's intentional illegitimate use of the Complainant's RUNESCAPE trade mark in connection with the Disputed Domain Name precludes a finding that any offering of services on the Website constitutes a bona fide offering (see Madonna Ciccone p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com",
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847 and Viacom International, Inc., Paramount Pictures Corporation, and Blockbuster Inc. v. ...
2012-02-15 - Case Details
Factual Background
The Complainant is the registered owner of the trademark IWC in relation to goods in Class 14 (watches and their components), see inter alia Swiss registration No. P-469777, registered February 22, 2000; and US registration No 1,205,403, registered August 17, 1982. ...
2012-03-15 - Case Details
Moreover, if the evidence indicated the likelihood that the Domain Name (and the company name) were chosen in order to exploit the Complainant’s trademark, that could not be considered a bona fide commercial use for purposes of the Policy. 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. ...
2012-03-15 - Case Details
The result of bad faith acquisition is equivalent to bad faith registration and is sufficient to fall within the scope of Paragraph 4(b)(i) of the Policy (Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com",
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847).
For these reasons, this Panel finds that the Respondent acquired and uses the disputed domain name in bad faith.
7. ...
2012-05-04 - Case Details
D2001-0537 사건과 GA Modefine S.A. v. Sparco P/L,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0419, 사건에서 신청인의 양도 신청은 거절되었다는 사실은 이를 더욱 명백하게 보여주는 것이다. ...
2013-05-13 - Case Details
The Panel has accessed the page at “http://www.lesportsacoutlet.com/lesportsac-dual-zipper-cosmetic-bag-blue-rich-flowers-p-140.html”, which advertises a “LeSportsac” cosmetics bag; the same image appears in Complainant’s Annex F. ...
2013-06-11 - Case Details
The Complainant is the registrant of the following trademarks:
ROBERT KENNEDY COLLEGE, Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (IGE), registration number P-507118, registered January 30, 2003, class 41: The owner of the above trademark was recorded on January 30, 2003 as Association Robert Kennedy College. ...
2013-06-05 - Case Details
“The issue is not whether confusion is likely in the trademark sense (that is, confusion as to source based on the domain name and its use in connection with a website), but rather, whether the domain name, standing alone, is sufficiently similar to the trademark to justify moving on to other elements of a claim for cybersquatting.” F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG v. P Martin,
WIPO Case No. D2009-0323. “Each case must be judged on its own facts, and the assessment will always depend on the specific mark and the specific domain name.” ...
2012-08-17 - Case Details
Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 5.1 of the Policy and 14 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name be transferred to the Complainant.
John P. Gaffney
Sole Panelist
Dated: August 25, 2011...
2011-09-09 - Case Details
In addition, given the extensive and worldwide reputation of the NESTLÉ trademark and the presence of Complainant in the Australia and China, as determined by the documentary evidence and contentions submitted, the Panel sees no evidence of a good faith registration, nor can the Panel find any explanation, other than bad faith in the reproduction of Complainant’s trademark in the disputed domain name. See Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0847. Such circumstance is further evidence of registration of a domain name in bad faith under paragraph 4(b) of the Policy.
...
2011-01-24 - Case Details
Selon les critères dégagés par les juridictions françaises, “pour l’appréciation de la renommée, (…) doivent être prises en compte notamment la part de marché occupée par la marque, l’intensité de son exploitation, son étendue géographique, la durée de son usage, l’importance des investissements auxquels elle donne lieu” (Cour d’appel de Paris, 18 mai 2001, PIBD 2001, III, p.576).
Les pièces communiquées par le Requérant pour attester de la renommée revendiquée sont des articles de la presse anglaise de 2001 qui concernent la phase de pré-commercialisation du médicament CIALIS par le Requérant en Europe, à savoir notamment les phases d’obtention d’AMM et de promotion de l’introduction sur le marché de ce médicament. ...
2010-12-23 - Case Details
Richi Industry S. r. l.,
WIPO Case No. D2001-1206; Utensilerie Associate S. p. A. v. C & M,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0159; Shaw Industries Group Inc., Columbia Insurance Company v. Wan-Fu China, Ltd.,
WIPO Case No. ...
2010-10-22 - Case Details
The next day, Respondent objected to the supplemental filing citing Gordon Sumner, p/k/a Sting v. Michael Urvan,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0596.
The Center appointed Maxim H. Waldbaum as the sole panelist in this matter on July 13, 2011. ...
2011-08-04 - Case Details
On the other hand, 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.
The Respondent has exhibited a typewritten and unsigned copy of what appears to be a letter dated March 31, 2008 to a publisher, proposing that it publish a book Cooking with Red Bull. ...
2010-04-28 - Case Details
En décider autrement reviendrait à admettre que la violation intentionnelle par un défendeur des droits d'un requérant peut constituer un intérêt légitime, ce qui serait à l'évidence contraire au but poursuivi par les Principes directeurs (Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”,
Litige OMPI No. D2000-0847). C'est également le lieu de rappeler que, conformément à l'opinion majoritaire des Commissions administratives, les discussions ayant eu lieu entre les parties après que l'attention du défendeur a été attirée sur l'existence des droits du requérant peut être exploitée pour démontrer sa mauvaise foi suivant les circonstances du cas d'espèce, ne serait-ce qu'en raison du fait que le défendeur attend fréquemment d'avoir été avisé du litige par le requérant avant de se manifester, comme il en est allé en l'espèce (Synthèse, chiffre 3.6, qui cite à cet égard CBS Broadcasting, Inc. v. ...
2010-04-27 - Case Details
La Demandada
La Demandada parece ser una diseñadora gráfica que presta sus servicios profesionales a través de una sociedad llamada A. P. S.L. y que, de acuerdo con la información incluida en su página web corporativa, se especializa en el diseño y ejecución de proyectos de presencia y posicionamiento corporativo en Internet.
...
2010-08-24 - Case Details
The Respondent’s use of the disputed domain name to intentionally trade on the well-known mark of another, in order to lure Internet users to a website unrelated to the trademark owner, cannot and does not 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). Moreover, the Respondent has not registered the disputed domain name in connection with a bona fide intent as the Respondent is no licensee of the Complaint with regard to the trademark rights or the right to register the disputed domain name. ...
2013-11-18 - Case Details