About Intellectual Property IP Training IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Industrial Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgements IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Industrial Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships The Organization Working with WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Industrial Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars World IP Day WIPO Magazine Raising Awareness Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Economics Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Enforcement Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions COVID-19 Support National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO ALERT Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Job Vacancies Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight

Full Text Search on WIPO Panel Decisions

Found 3756   document(s)s (0.027 sec)

Rows

<<  <  2781 - 2800  >  >>

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-2346 for g4sgp.com html (20 KB)

In such instances, those users would not be exposed to a respondent’s pornographic content but for that linkage” (Sound Unseen, Ltd; Apple Bottoms, LLC; and Cornell Haynes p/k/a “Nelly” v. Patrick Vanderhorst, WIPO Case No. D2005-0636). The Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s G4S trademarks. ...

2020-11-13 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-1833 for mixthermoshop.com html (21 KB)

The use of a domain name which intentionally trades on the fame of another and suggests affiliation with the trademark owner 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; WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.8). ...

2020-09-11 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-1889 for comjohnhancock.com, iohnhancock.com, j0hnhancock.com, jhohnhancock.com, jiohnhancock.com, jkohnhancock.com, jlhnhancock.com, jobnhancock.com, joghnhancock.com, johbnhancock.com, johgnhancock.com, johhhancock.com, johmnhancock.com, johnbancock.com, johnbhancock.com ... html (24 KB)

Section 3.5 of the WIPO Overview 3.0 states that “[p]articularly with respect to ‘automatically’ generated pay-per-click links, panels have held that a respondent cannot disclaim responsibility for content appearing on the website associated with its domain name (nor would such links ipso facto vest the respondent with rights or legitimate interests).” ...

2020-10-21 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision DIO2020-0010 for glencore.io html (20 KB)

The Complainant is the owner of many trademark registrations which contain the word “glencore” (“the Trademark”) among which the following trademarks: - Swiss trademark GLENCORE No. P-450144, registered on March 19, 1996, in classes 1, 4, 6, 22, 29, 30 31, 35, 36, 39, 40, and 42; - European Union trademark GLENCORE No. 012054128, registered on January 5, 2014, in classes 1, 4, 6, 14, 22, 29, 30, 31, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, and 42; - International trademark GLENCORE No. 691954, registered on March 19, 1998, in classes 1, 4, 6, 22, 29, 30, 31, 35, 36, 39, 40, and 42. ...

2020-10-19 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-2120 for tylenol1st.com html (21 KB)

The Complainant holds a large portfolio of registered trademark rights in the mark TYLENOL in many jurisdictions, including: Swiss Registration No. P-408928 TYLENOL, word, registered on February 28, 1994, in class 5; United States Registration No. 890,360 TYLENOL, word, registered on May 5, 1970, in class 5; United States Registration No. 1,621,973 TYLENOL, word, registered on November 13, 1990, in class 5; and United States Registration No. 2,660,253 TYLENOL, word, registered on December 10, 2002, in class 5; (collectively the “TYLENOL mark”). ...

2020-10-06 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2022-1835 for paniavision.com pdf (160 KB)

Moreover, where the Complainant’s trademark and the disputed domain name differ only because the addition of one letter in the disputed domain name, and the differences between them could be attributed to a typographical error, confusing similarity will be found. Panavision, Inc., Panavision International, L. P. v. Roomwithnet Systems (I) P.Ltd./ Eyecircus Studio Pvt. Ltd, WIPO Case No. D2005-0521. The Panel concludes that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s PANAVISION trademark. ...

2022-08-30 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-2923 for voguetravels.com html (20 KB)

As regards the past use of the disputed domain name, currently redirecting to an error page, the Panel finds that, according to the Wayback Machine pages (“www.archive.org”) provided by the Respondent (Annex III of the Response), some of them also reproduced in the Complainant’s cease-and-desist letter sent to the Respondent (Annex P of the Complaint), the disputed domain name has been used in connection with what appears to be a bona fide offering of travel agency services before any notice of the current dispute, promoting the Respondent’s own business without intending to trade off or exploit the Complainant’s trademark, which appears to be well known in a different field. ...

2021-12-14 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-2111 for enel.host html (22 KB)

Softech Ltd., DNS Administrator (gold), WIPO Case No. D2007-1699; and F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG v. P Martin, WIPO Case No. D2009-0323). The addition of the generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.host” to the disputed domain name constitutes a technical requirement of the Domain Name System (“DNS”). ...

2021-11-10 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-3027 for tysonfoodsus.com html (21 KB)

In 2020 Complainant generated more than USD 43 billion in sales as a member of the S&P 500, and has more than 139,000 employees at facilities in the U.S. and around the world. Complainant owns numerous registrations for the TYSON Mark in the U.S., where Respondent is located, and around the world, including: - United States Registration No. 1748683, TYSON, registered January 26, 1993 for “fresh and frozen, cooked and uncooked meat and poultry sold separately and as part of prepackaged prepared meals” in international class 29 and claiming a first use date of January 1, 1958; and - United States Registration No. 2810231, TYSON, registered February 3, 2004 for “beef and pork” in international class 29 and claiming a first use date of January 10, 2003. ...

2021-12-28 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-2930 for bvlgaritw.com, tw-bvlgari.com html (21 KB)

It is well-established that non-use of a domain name does not prevent finding of bad faith.7 “[P]anelists have found that the non-use of a domain name (including a blank or “coming soon” page) would not prevent a finding of bad faith under the doctrine of passive holding”. ...

2021-12-01 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-3416 for salomon-indonesia.com, salomon-malaysia.com, salomon-singapore.com, salomonmalaysia.com, salomonphilippines.com html (22 KB)

The Respondents’ registration and use of the Disputed Domain Names indicate that such registration and use has been done for the specific purpose of trading on and targeting the name and reputation of the Complainant and its SALOMON Mark. See Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and “Madonna.com”, WIPO Case No. D2000-0847 (“[t]he only plausible explanation for Respondent’s actions appears to be an intentional effort to trade upon the fame of Complainant’s name and mark for commercial gain”). ...

2022-01-10 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2021-1310 for swatchholdings.com html (20 KB)

VistaPrint Technologies Ltd., WIPO Case No. D2015-0886; Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi / “Madonna.com”, WIPO Case No. D2000-0847). For these reasons, this Panel finds that Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. 7. ...

2021-07-09 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-3365 for koranaturals.com html (22 KB)

D2000-0847)); cf. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 2.12.2 (“[P]anels have generally declined to find respondent rights or legitimate interests in a domain name on the basis of a corresponding trademark registration where the overall circumstances demonstrate that such trademark was obtained primarily to circumvent the application of the UDRP or otherwise prevent the complainant’s exercise of its rights (even if only in a particular jurisdiction.”). ...

2021-03-01 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2020-2880 for fortnummasons.com html (20 KB)

As explained at section 3.1.4 of the WIPO Overview 3.0, “[p]anels have consistently found that the mere registration of a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar (particularly domain names comprising typos or incorporating the mark plus a descriptive term) to a famous or widely-known trade mark by an unaffiliated entity can by itself create a presumption of bad faith”. ...

2020-12-21 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2019-0016 for bvinecker.com, virgin-unite.com html (24 KB)

Furthermore, although the Domain Names do not resolve to any active websites, passive holding of the Domain Names does not prevent finding of bad faith. “[P]anelists have found that the non-use of a domain name (including a blank or “coming soon” page) would not prevent a finding of bad faith under the doctrine of passive holding”.13 One of the factors applied to passive holding doctrine is “the implausibility of any good faith use to which the domain name may be put”.14 Here, the bad faith registration and use of the Domain Names in relation to the phishing email activity, makes implausible any good faith use of the Domain Names in the future. ...

2019-02-21 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2018-1418 for marypfaffko.com html (20 KB)

John Adem, WIPO Case No. D2000-1480; Gordon Sumner, p/k/a Sting v. Michael Urvan, WIPO Case No. D2000-0596; The E.W. Scripps Company v. Sinologic Industries, WIPO Case No. ...

2018-09-10 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2018-1152 for coolsculptingcards.com html (24 KB)

D2017-0160. WIPO Overview 3.0, section 3.1.4, states that “[p]anels have moreover found the following types of evidence to support a finding that a respondent has registered a domain name to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to its website by creating a likelihood of confusion with the complainant’s mark: (i) actual confusion, (ii) seeking to cause confusion (including by technical means beyond the domain name itself) for the respondent’s commercial benefit, even if unsuccessful, (iii) the lack of a respondent’s own rights to or legitimate interests in a domain name, (iv) redirecting the domain name to a different respondent-owned website, even where such website contains a disclaimer, (v) redirecting the domain name to the complainant’s (or a competitor’s) website, and (vi) absence of any conceivable good faith use.” ...

2018-08-09 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2017-1541 for suntrust-park.com html (21 KB)

Numerous UDRP panels have recognized that incorporating a trademark in its entirety can be sufficient to establish that a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a registered trademark. See, Hoffmann-La Roche AG v. P Martin, WIPO Case No. D2009-0323; Dixons Group Plc. v. Mr. Abu Abdullaah, WIPO Case No. D2001-0843; V&S Vin & Sprit AB v. ...

2017-10-20 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2017-1555 for osam.site html (21 KB)

The addition of non-distinctive phrases or a TLD suffix is not sufficient to dispel confusing similarity. See, Hoffmann-LaRoche AG v. P Martin, WIPO Case No. D2009-0323; Dixons Group Plc. v. Mr. Abu Abdullaah, WIPO Case No. D2001-0843; V&S Vin & Sprit AB v. ...

2017-10-19 - Case Details

WIPO Domain Name Decision D2017-1408 for amegybannk.com html (20 KB)

See, e.g.,SAP SE v. Lakshmi Reddy Bhumireddy and P. Hareesh, WIPO Case No. D2017-0396; Compagnie Générale des Etablissements Michelin v. Cameron Jackson, WIPO Case No. ...

2017-09-01 - Case Details