This would be true, in particular, in the case of a well-known or famous mark. Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409. The word “franchise” is generic in the context of the goods and services being offered by Respondent on its “www.holidayinnfranchise.com” web page. ...
2012-06-06 - Case Details
Factual Background
The Complainant develops and publishes video games designed for multiple platforms, including personal computers, mobile phones, “iOS” devices (e.g. iPhone, iPad), handheld gaming units (e.g. Sony Playstation Portable, Nintendo DS), and gaming console systems (e.g. Microsoft Xbox 360, Sony Playstation, Nintendo Wii), delivered through physical retail, digital download, online platforms and cloud streaming services.
...
2013-03-11 - Case Details
GA Modefine SA v. Yonghui Huang,
WIPO Case No. D2008-0355; Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409; Florida Department of Management Services v. ...
2013-07-02 - Case Details
Moreover, prior UDRP panels have recognized that the addition of a merely descriptive term to a famous mark in a domain name is insufficient in itself to avoid a finding of confusing similarity because such an addition fails to detract from the overall impression that the domain name is associated with the famous mark. See Sony Kabushuki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409. In the case at hand, the dominant part of the Disputed Domain Name is Complainant's famous EBAY Mark followed by the term "jordans." ...
2014-12-01 - Case Details
Este Experto considera que el uso del nombre de dominio en disputa por parte de la Titular ha creado la falsa impresión de asociación con la Promovente. (Ver, mutatis mutandi, Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
Caso OMPI No. D2000-1409) y ello implica que la Titular debería conocer previamente de la existencia de las marcas NISSAN y TIIDA de la Promovente. ...
2013-07-18 - Case Details
Among other products, it develops and publishes video games designed for multiple platforms, including personal computers, mobile phones, “iOS” devices such as iPhone, iPad, handheld gaming units, such as Sony Playstation Portable and Nintendo DS and gaming console systems such as Microsoft Xbox 360, Sony Playstation, and Nintendo Wii, delivered through physical retail, digital download, online platforms and cloud streaming services. ...
2013-08-19 - Case Details
Este Experto considera que el uso de los nombres de dominio en disputa por parte del Demandado ha creado la falsa impresión de asociación con la Demandante. (Ver, mutatis mutandi, Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
Caso OMPI No. D2000-1409) y ello implica que El Demandado debía conocer previamente de la existencia de la marca ITMA de la Demandante. ...
2013-08-12 - Case Details
The Complainant also appears to be alleging
(by way of a quotation from the decision in Sony Kabushiki Kaisha also trading as Sony Corporation v.
Inja, Kil, WIPO Case No. D2000-1409) that it is inconceivable that the Respondent could make any
https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-1409.html
page 4
active use of the Domain Name without creating a false impression of association with the
Complainant. ...
2022-12-01 - Case Details
That activity falls squarely within the explicit example of bad faith registration and
use found in the Policy at paragraph 4(b)(iv), the obvious creation of a false association with Complainant.
Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil, WIPO Case No. D2000-1409;
DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. ...
2023-04-24 - Case Details
v) It is unlikely that the Respondent could make any active use of the disputed domain name without creating a false impression of association with the Complainant. See Sony Kabushiki Kaisha also trading as Sony Corporation v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000 1409.
(vi) Bad faith may be also deduced from the fact that the disputed domain name was anonymously registered. ...
2021-06-01 - Case Details
Furthermore, the Panel may also make negative inferences arising from the Respondent’s failure to respond. See, e.g., Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409.
The Panel finds that the Complainant has established that the Disputed Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith, as outlined in paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy.
7. ...
2020-05-29 - Case Details
It is well-established that in considering whether a disputed domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a registered trademark, the Top-Level Domain (for example, “.com” and “.net”) may be disregarded (GA Modefine SA v. Yonghui Huang,
WIPO Case No. D2008-0355; Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409; Florida Department of Management Services v. ...
2020-02-24 - Case Details
Such a “pattern of conduct” of registering domain names utilizing well-known trademarks in which the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests is further evidence of Respondent’s registration and use of the disputed domain name in bad faith pursuant to 4(b)(ii) of the Policy. See Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409. Numerous UDRP panels have found that a pattern of registration of domain names of other well-known entities is evidence of bad faith registration and use of the disputed domain names. ...
2017-08-21 - Case Details
Finally, with regard
to bad faith, Complainant cites a prior WIPO decision for the premise that registration
of a trademark or famous mark as a domain name, by an entity that has no relationship
to the mark, in and of itself, is evidence of bad faith registration and use.
Sony Kabushiki Kaisha a/t/a Sony Corporation v. Fujiko Kikuno, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1372 (December 27, 2000). ...
2002-10-17 - Case Details
Accordingly, Complainant
cites a prior WIPO decision for the premise that registration of a trademark
or famous mark as a domain name, by an entity that has no relationship to the
mark, in and of itself, is evidence of bad faith registration and use. Sony
Kabushiki Kaisha a/t/a Sony Corporation v. Fujiko Kikuno, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1372 (December 27, 2000). ...
2002-08-15 - Case Details
Similarly, the mere addition of "usergroup" to a well known trademark is unlikely
to be significant to the issue of confusing similarly. See, for example, Sony
Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil, WIPO Case
No. D2000-1409 (domain name such as and
are confusingly similar to SONY trademark). ...
2002-09-19 - Case Details
Previous Panels have held that the awareness
of a Complainant’s mark at the time of registration of a disputed domain name
that is confusingly similar to that mark is evidence of bad faith (see The
Channel Tunnel Group Ltd v. Powell, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0038, and Sony Kabushifi Kaisha also trading as Sony Corporation
v. Sin, Eonmok WIPO Case No. D2000-1007).
- The Respondent refers to a "complex trademark dispute in court proceedings"
but it produces no document relating to such proceedings. ...
2003-06-25 - Case Details
D2000-1626 (February
7, 2001) (finding confusingly similar to NBA); Sony Corporation
v. Sin, Eonmok, WIPO Case No. D2000-1007
(November 16, 2000) (finding to be confusingly similar to
SONY); Pfizer Inc. v. ...
2003-10-17 - Case Details
This Panel considers that the mere registration
of a famous trademark as domain name evidences the bad faith of the Respondent
(See Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409; Europay
International S.A. v. ...
2004-05-11 - Case Details
Consequently, Complainant having shown a prima facie evidence, the burden
of proof should be shifted on the shoulders of the Respondent, as results from
consolidated case law, in view of the large number of decisions that have ruled
this way, such as for instance: Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Sony.net, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1074, November 20, 2000; Asia Pacific Breweries
Limited v. ...D2000-0003, February 18, 2000) or the fact that the domain name comprises
a name which can only sensibly refer to the Complainant (see Sony
Kabushiki Kaisha v. Sony.net mentioned above ).
Finally, it can be noted that Respondent’s behaviour in the course of the negotiations could be seen to confirm the absence of bad faith as it reveals his intent to find an amicable settlement allowing both parties to use their respective names without interfering with each other. ...
2004-06-11 - Case Details