So if you are e-commerce
website be sure to join the webring!" (Complaint, Exhibit P). The "onesex.com"
website is a pornographic site (Complaint, Exhibits Q and S).
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. ...
2000-04-18 - Case Details
In reply to the Respondent’s letter, the Complainant’s attorney asked the other party "for a generic indication of the conditions under which he was willing
to bring the dispute to an amicable conclusion (annex O) and to the request, formulated by the counterparty to ‘put forward an economic offer’ (annex P), the
[Complainant’s] lawyer declared herself prepared to refund Mr. Cialone for the registration costs because of the obvious infringement of the exclusive rights
perpetrated to the damage of De Agostini by Mr. ...
2002-09-18 - Case Details
D2000-0279);
and Panavision Inc And Panavision International, L P v. Gala Trade Inc,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1533.
(iv) The Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain names
constitutes a pattern of registering trademark-related domain names in bad faith
pursuant to paragraph 4(b)(ii) of the Policy. ...
2006-09-27 - Case Details
Further, it is said the Complainant’s counsel could have done a simple Lexis search in the "P-Trak" database, yielding, the same name and same mailing address as has always been listed for the domain name. ...
2002-01-11 - Case Details
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Omnipod, Inc v Ahmed Nassef
Case No D2002-0084
1.The Parties
The Complainant is Omnipod, Inc of 440 Ninth Avenue, 8th Floor,
New York, NY10001, United States of America.
The Respondent is Ahmed Nassef of P O Box 830184, 11183 Amman, Jordan.
2.The Domain Name and Registrar
The domain name at issue is .
...
2002-04-24 - Case Details
The Respondent’s alleged use is not use of the domain name in connection with any bona fide offering of goods or services within the meaning of paragraph 4(c)(i) of the Policy.
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. ...
2001-10-08 - Case Details
A report by Pricewaterhouse
Coopers in August, 2000, valued the ONIDA brand at between 550 –600 crores [Complaint,
Annex P].
Respondent, Accuway Services, Inc., doing business as Onida.com, is a developer
of websites. ...
2002-01-10 - Case Details
Respondent submits that "registration of a mark is prima facie evidence of
validity, which creates a rebuttable presumption that a mark is inherently distinctive"
and cites WIPO Case D2001-1367, Tab G,
p. 8.
Respondent submits that a panel shall look to the rules of law set out in decisions of the court in the U.S. where both the Complainant and Registrant are domiciled in the U.S.
...
2002-08-21 - Case Details
En segundo lugar, cabe aclarar que aun en el caso de que se tratara de la misma marca, el "principio del agotamiento del derecho de marcas a nivel doméstico" contenido en el precepto que nos ocupa [Rangel Medina, David, "Derecho Intelectual" Ed. MacGraw-Hill, México, 1998, p.82], permite que cualquier persona comercialice, distribuya, adquiera o use productos a los que se aplica la marca registrada luego de que ellos hubiesen sido introducidos al mercado mexicano con autorización del titular de la marca, pero de ninguna manera le confiere el derecho exclusivo a ese tercero para reservarse -en detrimento del propietario de la marca o alguno de sus licenciatarios-, el registro de un nombre de dominio conteniendo la marca registrada.
...
2004-05-24 - 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.
Second, the Character Name Marks are arbitrary and fanciful and sufficiently unique that it is unlikely that the Respondent devised it on its own. ...
2001-01-30 - Case Details
Buffalo Wu, CA-00-00178-A (memorandum decision at p. 8); see also Yahoo! Inc. v. David Ashby, Case No. D2000-0241 (administrative panel decision) and Yahoo! ...
2000-11-03 - Case Details
Aldous LJ (for the Court of Appeal) expressed the test (at p.493) that "a name which will, by reason of its similarity to another, inherently lead to passing off is an instrument of fraud". ...
2000-08-04 - Case Details
The Polygenix Group Co., WIPO Case No. D2000-0163 at p. 5 (‘VEUVECLICQUOT.ORG 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’); accord Harrods Limited v. ...
2000-09-18 - Case Details
On the same day the Center transmitted by fax and by mail copies of the foregoing documents to Karajan Pty Ltd, Mr John C Webster, P O Box 250, Ashmore City, Queensland 4214. Australia.
A Response was received from the Respondent on December 20, 2000 [electronic version] and January 3, 2001 [hard copy]. ...
2001-02-14 - Case Details
Internet
Holding cites Newstoday Printers and Publishers (P) Ltd. v. InetU, Inc.
WIPO Case No. D2001-0085 (May 23, 2001),
for the proposition that, even if Internet Holding had registered
primarily with a view to onward sale, anyone has a right to register common
words.
...
2002-09-30 - Case Details
On August 16, 2002, Roni A Jaoude secured through the California Business Portal, a corporate name, William Lawsons Inc. See Complainant’s Annex P
There is evidence that until a recent date, if one were to access it automatically linked to health products sourced in the South Pacific. ...
2003-05-12 - Case Details
The software
license did not include any license to use the Marks. (Complaint, ¶¶23-24 and
Annex P; Response, ¶¶25, 27 and Annex J)
Respondent Transfers the Domain Name. On February 8,
2001, Respondent sold the domain name to Market Domains, LLC, for $250,000,
paid with a promissory note in Respondent's favor in the full amount of the
purchase price, secured by the domain name.
...
2002-10-15 - Case Details
Thus, acquisition of a domain name in bad faith must be considered
as equivalent to registration in bad faith for the purposes of paragraph 4)
b) of the Policy (see WIPO Case No. D2000-0847
Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and "Madonna.com").
In view of the above, the Panel finds that the Domain Name was registered and used in bad faith.
7. ...
2002-12-03 - Case Details
Thus, acquisition
of a domain name in bad faith must be considered as equivalent to registration
in bad faith for the purposes of paragraph 4) b) of the Policy (see WIPO
Case No. D2000-0847, Madonna Ciccone, p/k/a Madonna v. Dan Parisi and
"Madonna.com").
In view of the above, the Panel finds that the Domain Name was registered and used in bad faith.
7. ...
2002-12-10 - Case Details
The "Bell Technologies"
web page is a subpage of Respondent’s home page, and
offers for sale a variety of telecommunications and computer equipment, including
cellular/PCS telephones, web hosting services, and Internet telephony and telephone
calling cards, from a variety of business enterprises unaffiliated with Complainant.
(Id, para 22-23 & Annexes N-P)
Respondent’s personal name is "Fred Bell". Respondent acknowledges
registration of the disputed domain names. ...
2001-07-13 - Case Details