The Panel derives further support for its view from the fact that "basf" is a coined word or acronym having no meaning other than as a trademark describing the goods and services of the Complainant (see Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409).
In the absence of anything from the Respondent to gainsay or explain away the inferences which are otherwise properly drawn, the Panel is therefore satisfied that the Complainant has established the third element under paragraph 4(a) of the Policy.
7. ...
2015-06-26 - Case Details
That, under the Policy, the Respondent’s pattern of prior bad faith registration of domain names using well-
known trademarks in which the Respondent had no rights or legitimate interests provides further evidence of
the Respondent’s bad faith registration and use (and cites Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony
Corporation) v. Inja, Kil, WIPO Case No. D2000-1409; NFL Properties, Inc. et al. ...
2025-06-19 - 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. ...
2017-11-21 - Case Details
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION
Celine Dion and Sony Music Entertainment (Canada) Inc. v. Jeff Burgar operating or carrying on business as Celine Dion Club
Case No. ...The Parties
The Complainants: Celine Dion and Sony Music Entertainment (Canada) Inc., both of 1121 Leslie Street, Toronto, M3C 2J9, Canada.
The Respondent: Jeff Burgar, operating or carrying on business as Celine Dion Club, PO Box 2570, 4901 51st Avenue, High Prairie, Alberta, T0G 1EO, Canada.
2. ...
2001-02-16 - Case Details
LACK OF RESPONDENT’S RIGHT OR INTERESTS
Complainant contends that Respondent has no rights to or legitimate interests
in the domain name because Complainant’s and its predecessors’ use of the SOTHEBY’S
predate Respondent’s registration by more than 250 years and in support cites
Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1409 (December 9, 2000).
More pertinently, Complainant contends Respondent has no registered mark identical or similar to the domain name, that it has no licence or authorization regarding the mark from or affiliation to the Respondent.
...BAD FAITH REGISTRATION AND USE
Complainant contends that the registration of a well-known trademark is evidence
of a bad faith registration and cites numerous prior decisions of Panels in
support including Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1409 (December 9, 2000). Donna Karan Studio
v. ...
2003-07-03 - Case Details
The Panel acknowledges a prior Panel
determination that such "deliberate creation of initial interest confusion
and the consequent diversion of Internet traffic is sufficient to establish
bad faith on the Respondent’s part." See e.g. Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications
International AB, Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Sony Corporation v.
...
2003-09-23 - Case Details
Based upon the numerous trademark and service mark registrations for, and the
fame, goodwill and notoriety associated with, the HOLIDAY INN® mark and
HOLIDAY INN® formative marks, it is impossible to conceive of any circumstance
in which the Respondent could legitimately use the Domain Name without creating
a false impression of association with the Complainant. See Sony Kabushiki
Kaisha also trading as Sony Corporation v. Sin, Eonmok, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1007, (no right or legitimate interest because the complainant’s
famous mark "is not one that the Respondent would legitimately choose in
the context of provision of goods, services or information via a Web site unless
seeking to create an impression of an association with the complainant");
Six Continents Hotels, Inc. v. ...
2003-10-27 - Case Details
In particular the Complainant claims that:
(a) the “Respondent registered a distinctive domain name, nearly identical to that of Sallie Mae in order to intentionally divert customers to its web site for financial gain”;
(b) the “Respondent’s use of a registered service mark evidences its bad faith”;
(c) “Sallie Mae has reserved the rights to the name SALLIE MAE by registering the service mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and through its common law rights to the name”;
(d) “Sallie Mae is also registered in several foreign countries and Sallie Mae has filed for protection under the Madrid Protocol”;
(e) the Respondent “has constructive notice of Sallie Mae’s rights”;
(f) the United States congress has granted Sallie Mae and the Complainant “exclusive rights in the name “Sallie Mae” or any variation thereof” under section 440(e)(3) of the federal Higher Education Act 1965 (as amended);
(g) the “Respondent’s bad faith is further highlighted by the fact that the disputed domain name is a lengthened version of one commonly associated with and identified as Sallie Mae”;
(h) “combining a famous mark with a generic word or words (especially the product that the famous mark is associated with) does not alleviate the potential for confusion”;
(i) “The mark that is incorporated in the Respondent’s domain name is distinctive”; and
(j) “Sallie Mae is a well established and globally-known educational lender.”
5.7 In support of its contentions the Complainant relies upon the decision
in Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kill
(WIPO Case No. D2000-1409) in
so far as it was held in that case that the addition of a suffix did not detract
from the overall impression of the dominant part of the name.
5.8 The Complainant also relies upon the decision
in Sallie Mae, Inc. v. ...
2005-01-27 - Case Details
Diabetes Home Care, Inc. and DHC
Services, WIPO Case No. D2001-0174;
Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409; America Online,
Inc v. ...
2004-12-17 - Case Details
The Covance Campaign, WIPO
Case No. D2004-0206 (April 30, 2004); see also Sony Kabushiki Kaisha
(also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1409 (December 9, 2000).
...
2004-10-06 - Case Details
Diabetes Home care and DHC services,
WIPO Case No. D2001-0174; Sony Kabushiki
Kaisha also trading as Sony Corporation v. Kil Inja, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1409; America Online Inc v. ...
2006-02-09 - Case Details
Factual Background
Complainant is a wholly owned subsidiary of Sony Pictures Entertainment, engaged in motion picture and television production and distribution. Complainant and its predecessors in interest and related entities have used the mark SCREEN GEMS in connection with motion pictures and television programs since the 1930s, and own five U.S. trademark registrations for the mark (Reg. ...
2006-04-21 - Case Details
However, it is clear that the website includes logos of such manufacturers as LG, SHARP, SAMSUNG, SONY and TOSHIBA. As the Complainant contends, and which is also a generally known fact, these companies are active in the field of home appliances and are therefore regarded as competitors of the Complainant.
...
2013-09-04 - Case Details
Finally, considering that the Respondent registered twelve domain names reflecting the LEGO mark, the Panel notes that evidence of multiple domain names reflecting the same famous trademark may in itself constitute evidence of a pattern of bad faith conduct. See, e.g., Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409.
The Panel finds that the Complainant has established that the Domain Names were registered and used in bad faith, as outlined in paragraph 4(a)(iii) of the Policy.
7. ...
2015-01-09 - Case Details
On this website a company called EasilyMobiles.com offers several mobile phones and accessories for sale (inter alia of Nokia, Sony and Motorola). Presently the domain name is connected to the website . ...
2001-12-12 - Case Details
The term “my” lacks
distinctiveness and therefore has little impact when comparing the terms at
issue. See Sony Corporation v. Sin, Eonmok, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1007 (). Further, given the fame and strength
of the mark VOLVO, such minor additions to this mark will still render the domain
name confusingly similar to the mark.
...
2005-06-18 - 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. ...
2013-05-13 - Case Details
One or more descriptive elements cannot remove the overall impression made on the public by the trademark which is the dominant part of the domain name (see Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409).
In these circumstances, the Panel finds that the disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trademark and that the requirements of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy have been satisfied.
...
2018-06-25 - Case Details
The presence of the additional word “learn” does not prevent a finding of confusing similarity (see, for example, Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409).
Accordingly, the Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to a trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
...
2019-09-24 - Case Details
v) It is unlikely that the Respondent could make any active use of the seven disputed domain names 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) By registering at least seven disputed domain names targeting the Complainant’s trademark, the Respondent has engaged in a bad faith pattern of abusive domain name registration within the meaning of paragraph 4(b)(ii) of the Policy.
...
2021-10-12 - Case Details