Le Tribunal fédéral a jugé dans le même sens que l’arrêt Audi dans une cause "WIR" reproduite dans la revue SIC ! 2000 p. 611. Le sommaire officieux du considérant 3 b de cet arrêt se lit en partie : "L’utilisation d’une marque étrangère par des tiers est admise lorsque son usage est nécessaire pour décrire l’objet du service offert". ...Un arrêt récent du Tribunal d’appel du canton du Tessin publié in SIC ! 2008 p. 122 applique ces principes à une marque très connue (POLO BY RALPH LAUREN). Celui qui n’est pas un revendeur agréé ne peut éditer des cartes de fidélité avec la marque célèbre en cause, ni placer une enseigne lumineuse contenant cette marque. ...
2011-02-21 - Case Details
Non è necessario provare i fatti noti (DTF 130 III 113 consid. 3.4 p. 121; 117 II 321 consid. 2 p. 323; 109 II 231 consid. 3c/bb p. 234).
E noto che i marchi ASPIRIN e ASPIRINA godono nel mondo di una notorietà particolarmente grande, come lo riconosce d'altronde la Resistente, e di una considerazione positiva nella maggior parte della popolazione.
...
2009-03-30 - Case Details
Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Complainant is the registered owner of a trademark which prominently includes the word "bespoke" and a design element which includes the letters "b", "s", "p" and "k" within a square. If the letters "b", "s", "p" and "k" are ignored, the disputed domain name is relevantly identical to the Complainant's mark.
...One of the majority Panelists does not consider that the smaller letters "b", "s", "p", "k", as included in the Complainant's mark, are sufficiently prominent for this purpose. As they appear in that mark, those letters form part of a relatively small design element, separately appended to the word "bespoke". ...
2014-11-14 - Case Details
It has also earlier been stated in Ape & Partners S. p. A. and PJS International S.A. v. Davis Lin,
WIPO Case No. D2013-1756, that another domain name , was reproducing the trademark PARAJUMPERS in its entirety and incorporated the key element, "parajumpers", of the trademark P.J.S. ...In accordance with the decision in Ape & Partners S. p. A. and PJS International S.A. v. Davis Lin, supra, the Panel finds the disputed domain name to be identical to the trademark PARAJUMPERS and incorporating the key element of P.J.S. ...
2014-06-04 - Case Details
It further comprises a misspelling of the WHATSAPP mark, replacing its last letter
“p” with a “k”. Both trademarks are clearly recognizable in the disputed domain name.
The Complainant further contends the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed
domain name. ...The Panel further notes the disputed domain name contains the WHATS mark as well as a misspelled
version of the WHATSAPP mark, combined with a final letter “k” instead of “p”, which further creates a term
related to the digital field, where the Complainant operates and has obtained its reputation, the term “apk”,
acronym for “Android Package Kit”. ...
2025-01-29 - Case Details
So far as the WHATSAPP trademark is concerned,
omission of the second letter “p” and substitution of the letter “k”, does not prevent a finding of confusing
similarity with the Domain Name, i.e. it contains, and its dominant element is, the WHATSAPP trademark.
...The substitution of the letter “k” for the second letter “p” (which would have created a domain
name identical to the WHATSAPP trademark) does not appear to have been added in an attempt to avoid the
misleading impression created by the Domain Name and, in any event, would be insufficient to do so.
...
2025-07-23 - Case Details
On April 2, 2024, Respondent replied, stating in part:
“We d id not register the domain to p revent you f rom registering it. We d id not register the domain
to sell i t . […] We have not set up a site that could confuse your clients. We do no t intend to
commerc ial ize the domain; we wil l engage in non-p ro f it ac t iv it ies . ” […]
“We call for agreement and peaceful dispute resolution, but we are p repared f o r any scenario . ”
“Regarding your inquiry about our business with bicycle parts f rom Italy, it concerns cycling training,
training advice, organizing cycling trips, organizing a community with Italian partners, and promoting
the sport. ...
2024-06-26 - Case Details
ARBITRATION
AND
MEDIATION CENTER
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Amanda Gosein-Cameron p/k/a Amanda Ghost v. Name Redacted
Case No. D2024-3772
1. The Parties
Complainant is Amanda Gosein-Cameron p/k/a Amanda Ghost, United States of America (“United States”),
represented by Pryor Cashman, LLP, United States.
...Badgley
Sole Panelist
Date: December 7, 2024
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Amanda Gosein-Cameron p/k/a Amanda Ghost v. Name Redacted
Case No. D2024-3772
1. The Parties
2. The Domain Names and Registrars
3. ...
2024-12-10 - Case Details
The registered PORSCHE DESIGN logo and trademark have not been used by the Respondent as it uses "P" and "D" in a different format and layout and in uppercase letters whilst the registered "pd" logo is made of small letters.
...This trademark is a device mark but the dominant features of the device are the letters "P" and "D", albeit in stylized form. The Panel finds that the Complainant has rights in the trademark PD.
...
2016-01-26 - Case Details
The Complainant submits that the disputed domain name contains the full WIKIPEDIA mark and full WIKIMEDIA mark with the mere substitution of the letter “o” or “m” for the letter “p” [the Panel notes in passing that the Complainant’s contention on this substitution is not quite correct in that the letter “o” in the disputed domain name is substituted for the letters “m” or “p” in the Complainant’s corresponding marks and the present Decision proceeds on that basis]. ...Comparing these to the disputed domain name on a straightforward side-by-side basis, it may be seen that the second level of the disputed domain name is alphanumerically identical to such marks with the exception of a single letter change from “p” to “o” or “m” to “o”, depending upon which trademark one uses for the comparison. The generic Top-Level Domain (“gTLD”) “.com” is viewed as a standard registration requirement and, as such, is disregarded under the first element of the Policy.
...
2020-07-30 - Case Details
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
America Online, Inc. v. Thomas P. Culver Enterprises
Case No. D2001-0564
1. The Parties
The Complainant is America Online, Inc., a corporation organized in the State of Delaware, United States of America (USA), with place of business in Dulles, Virginia, USA.
The Respondent is Thomas P. Culver Enterprises, with address in San Marcos, California, USA.
2. The Domain Names and Registrar
The disputed domain names are and .
...
2001-06-28 - Case Details
It has also authorized TATA Sons Limited to file the complaint as per Annexure P to the complaint.
As per complaint other two domain names i.e. jrdtata. ".com" and "ratantata.com", which apart from containing the trademark TATA of the complainant also incorporates respectively the personal names of the former and present chairman of the complainants. ...J.R.D Tata, have authorized TATA Sons Limited to file the complaint as per Annexure P to the complaint.
The six domain names ("tatapowerco.com", "tatahydro.com", "tatahoneywell.com", "tatayodogawa.com", "tatateleservices.com", and "tatassl.com") have the word Tata as the prefix and the rest of the words indicate one of the respective names or part of names of the companies under the TATA group. ...
2001-02-09 - Case Details
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
P&M Products Limited v. Color
Case No. D2002-0652
1. The Parties
The Complainant is P&M Products Limited ("P&M" or "Complainant"), a limited liability company having its principal place of business and registered office at 23-25 Bell Street, Reigate, Surrey, England RH2 7AD, United Kingdom.
...
2002-09-13 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on September 27, 2005.
The Center appointed Mr. P-E H Petter Rindforth as the sole panelist in this matter on September 29, 2005. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with Paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name, be transferred to the Complainant.
P-E H Petter Rindforth
Sole Panelist
Dated: October 25, 2005...
2005-11-03 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on August 3, 2005.
The Center appointed Thomas P. Pinansky as the sole
panelist in this matter on August 18, 2005. The Panel finds that it was properly
constituted. ...Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name be transferred to the Complainant.
Thomas P. Pinansky
Sole Panelist
Dated: August 26, 2005...
2005-09-14 - Case Details
Whereas in earlier decisions the Swiss Federal Tribunal held that the content of a website under the corresponding trademark shall be disregarded (see sic! 2003, p. 822 ; ATF 128 III 401, 403 et seq. ), a more recent decision suggests otherwise. The Swiss Federal Supreme Court has held that content of a website operated under a domain name must be taken into account when examining the likelihood of confusion (see sic! 2005, p. 283 ). It follows that, in an assessment of the risks of confusion under the Swiss Trademark Act, both the degree of similarity of the signs as well as the similarity of the respective goods and/or services may be taken into account. ...
2008-02-19 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on April 17, 2008.
The Center appointed Thomas P. Pinansky as the sole panelist in this matter on April 22, 2008. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name be transferred to the Complainant.
Thomas P. Pinansky
Sole Panelist
Date: April 29, 2008...
2008-05-07 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on April 10, 2006.
The Center appointed Mr. P-E Petter Rindforth as the sole panelist in this matter on April 18, 2006. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Complaint is denied.
P-E H Petter Rindforth
Sole Panelist
Dated: May 17, 2006...
2006-06-07 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on March 10, 2006.
The Center appointed P-E H Petter Rindforth as the sole panelist in this matter on April 6, 2006. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. ...Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Complaint is denied.
P-E H Petter Rindforth
Sole Panelist
Dated: May 17, 2006...
2006-06-07 - Case Details
Accordingly, the Center notified the Respondent’s default on August 2, 2006.
The Center appointed Thomas P. Pinansky as the sole
panelist in this matter on August 14, 2006. The Panel finds that it was properly
constituted. ...Decision
For all the foregoing reasons, in accordance with paragraphs 4(i) of the Policy and 15 of the Rules, the Panel orders that the domain name, be transferred to the Complainant.
Thomas P. Pinansky
Sole Panelist
Dated: August 18, 2008...
2006-08-30 - Case Details