Entertainer
complainants have successfully used the Policy when they demonstrated that their
names were used as commercial, rather than merely personal, identifiers, and
that their names have gained sufficient renown or notoriety to serve a trademark’s
function of developing a brand or goodwill factor of independent commercial
value, comparable to the goodwill attendant to a trademark for a hard good.
See, e.g., Celine Dion and Sony Music Entertainment (Canada) Inc. v. Jeff
Burgar operating or carrying on business as Celine Dion Club, WIPO
Case No. ...
2004-07-13 - Case Details
marks, Respondents have registered variations of the following famous trademarks, trade names, and celebrity names as domain names: "Disney, Sony, Blue Mountain Arts,
Hewlett-Packard, National Car Rental, Britney Spears, Salma Hayek, Oprah Winfrey, Jennifer Lopez, Star Wars, Mayo Clinic, Michael Jordan, Ally McBeal, Ricky Martin, USA Today, Taco Bell, Austin Powers, Microsoft, and Playboy". ...
2000-10-04 - Case Details
In 1999, Complainant carried advertisements from more than 3,500 companies, including American Express, Apple, Colgate-Palmolive, Disney, The Gap, Honda, IBM, Lego, Microsoft, Procter & Gamble, Sony, and others.
In 1999, Complainant's revenues were in excess of US$588 million.
The price one can command for advertising placed on the World Wide Web depends on "hits" and/or "page views." ...
2000-08-29 - Case Details
The Panel finds that Complainant has established a prima facie case and shifts the burden to Respondent to demonstrate rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. sony.net,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1074. By not submitting a response, Respondent has failed to invoke some circumstance that might demonstrate, pursuant to paragraph 4(c) of the Policy, that Respondent holds some rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. ...
2017-07-13 - Case Details
Factual Background
The Complainant is a wholly owned subsidiary of Sony Pictures Entertainment, Inc. The Complainant’s global operations are said to encompass motion picture production and distribution, acquisition and distribution of audio visual works in the home entertainment market, operation of studio facilities, development of new entertainment technologies, and distribution of audio visual works throughout the world.
...
2006-11-17 - Case Details
Vladimir Federov,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0639; Laure Pester (Lorie) and Sony Music Entertainment France SA v. Movie Name,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0312; Facebook Inc. v. Callverse Pty Ltd,
WIPO Case No. ...
2009-03-27 - Case Details
Tonetti,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0493 (July 12, 2000), Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409 (December 9, 2000). As such, Complainant has satisfied the first element of the Policy that Registrants’ domain names are identical or confusingly similar to Complainant’s WRANGLER trademarks.”
...
2007-06-21 - Case Details
D2000-0493; Rollerblade, Inc. v. Chris McCrady,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0429; and Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409).
Therefore, the first element of the Policy has been fulfilled.
...
2007-11-29 - Case Details
D2000-0493, Rollerblade, Inc. v. Chris McCrady,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0429 and Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409).
The first requirement of the Policy has been met.
...
2007-10-08 - Case Details
Diabetes Home Care, Inc. and DHC Services,
WIPO Case No. D2001-0174; Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409.)
In relation to domain names which include, apart from the trademark, a generic word such as “drug”, “online” or “pharmacy”, panelists have taken the view that the use of such descriptive or generic words in conjunction with the complainant’s trademark does not serve to negate the confusing similarity with the complainant’s trademark. ...
2007-10-04 - Case Details
In these circumstances, the evidential burden of production moves to the Respondent to show that it does have some right or legitimate interest in the disputed domain name (see Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. sony.net,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1074).
The Respondent has failed to make any submissions to the contrary and, accordingly, the Panel is satisfied that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name for the purposes of paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy.
...
2012-03-30 - Case Details
Among other products, 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 other gaming devices delivered through physical retail, digital download, online platforms and cloud streaming services. ...
2013-07-15 - Case Details
Moreover, prior UDRP panels have recognized that the addition of a merely generic or descriptive term to a famous trademark 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 trademark. See Sony Kabushuki Kaisha 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 PLAYBOY Mark with the generic prefix "mr" preceding it.
...
2014-06-23 - Case Details
The Complainant’s processors are used,
e.g., as the main Central Processing Unit (“CPU”) for mobile telephones, including those manufactured by
Apple, HTC, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, and Samsung. The Complainant’s products are included in over 225
billion devices. The Complainant operates a website at the “www.arm.com”.
...
2023-12-13 - Case Details
It has more than 6,500
customers in over 190 countries including DHL, Heineken and Sony.
The name Basware has no meaning in connection with the goods and services provided. Complainant use
the trademark BASWARE (hereinafter the “Mark”), for which it owns trademark registrations in several
jurisdictions, including:
- European Union Registration No. 001473123 (registered February 2, 2001)
- International Registration No. 1463849 (registered October 19, 2018), designating, among others,
Australia.
...
2025-12-08 - Case Details
The Complainant has sold over 180 billion products under its ARM brand, which includes processors used as the central processing unit for mobile telephones manufactured by Apple, HTC, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, and Samsung.
The Complainant owns numerous trade mark registrations for the ARM mark in various jurisdictions, including the following:
Jurisdiction
Mark
Registration No.
...
2021-09-20 - Case Details
The Complainant has sold over 180 billion products under its ARM brand, which includes processors used as the central processing unit for mobile telephones manufactured by Apple, HTC, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, and Samsung.
The Complainant owns numerous trade mark registrations for the ARM mark in various jurisdictions, including the following:
Jurisdiction
Mark
Registration No.
...
2021-09-20 - Case Details
D2002-0329, Rollerblade, Inc. v. Chris McCrady,
WIPO Case No. D2000-0429, Sony Corporation v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409, Missoni S.p.A. v. Chen Zhu, Chen Guang Yao, Cheng-Hong WU,
WIPO Case No. ...
2019-04-25 - Case Details
The panel notes that such use of the disputed domain name by the Respondent does not constitute a right or legitimate interest to use the Complainant’s trademark. See, Sony Corporation v. Domain Admin, Privatewhois.biz,
WIPO Case No. D2017-2341, citing the factors set forth in
Oki Data Americas, Inc. v. ...
2018-04-18 - Case Details
Zuccarini, Civil Action No. 01-CV-4854 (E.D. Pa. April 9, 2002);
Sony Corp. v. Zuccarini d/b/a Rave Club Berlin, NAF Claim No. FA0204000109040
(May 23, 2002); AT&T v. ...
2002-11-19 - Case Details