The panelist in the former case addressed the issue, comparing the likely reaction of the experienced Internet user (not likely to be confused) and the inexperienced Internet user (likely to be confused):
“The general rules as set forth above are easily applicable to domain names combining a trademark and a generic denomination correlating to services or products of the trademark holder (such as Microsoft Corporation v Momm AmedIa,
WIPO Case No. D2001-1454, , or Sony Kabushiki Kaisha (also trading as Sony Corporation) v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409 relating to and several other domain names incorporating the SONY trademark and a generic description). ...
2011-12-29 - Case Details
Once a complainant establishes that a respondent’s domain name is identical
or confusingly similar to the complainant’s mark, and that the complainant
has not authorized respondent to use the mark, the burden shifts to the respondent
to establish some right or legitimate interest in respect of the domain name.
Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Sony.net, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1074. In light of the Respondent’s default, the Panel
presumes that the Respondent has no such rights or legitimate interest.
...
2006-03-30 - Case Details
Superkay Worldwide, Inc.,
Caso OMPI No. D2004-0071; Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. sony.net,
Caso OMPI No. D2000-1074 y Charles Jourdan Holding AG v. AAIM,
Caso OMPI No. ...
2011-02-09 - Case Details
It also features information and links related to Nintendo's Wii platform, various Sony platforms including Playstation 3, PS2, PSP and Playstation. It also features a section for Microsoft's Xbox. ...
2009-08-24 - 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.
...
2008-10-28 - Case Details
An early example in which this proposition was established is Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Sony.net
WIPO Case No. D2000-1074.
The Complainant states that it has not authorised the Respondent to use the domain name. ...
2007-10-18 - Case Details
La marca ROCK101 se encuentra también registrada en México a partir de 2009 en la clase 9 internacional a favor de Sony BMG Music Entertainment (México) S.A. de C.V. en relación con discos, long play, cassette, compact disc, videograma, videoclip, dcc, dat, dvd, mini disc, videodisco, videocasette, disco digital, cd rom, dual disc, ring tone, master tone, speech tone, álbum digital y track digital.
5. ...
2011-09-07 - Case Details
In that respect, the Complainant cites the Decisions in Sony Corporation v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409 and F Hoffmann-La Roche A.G. v. Rudiger Meissner,
WIPO Case No. ...
2010-06-15 - Case Details
La Commission invitera les parties à se référer notamment à Guildinvest contre Krys,
Litige OMPI No. D2003-0592; Tour de Charme, S.A.R.L., Sony Music, Entertainment (Holland) B.V. et Mademoiselle Patricia Kaas contre Stars en Direct,
Litige OMPI No. ...
2009-10-29 - Case Details
Previous UDRP panels have found that where a domain name incorporates a registered trademark with the addition of a possessive pronoun, the domain name is identical or confusingly similar for the purposes of the Policy. Sony Corporation v. Sin Eonmok,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1007. The likelihood of such confusion is increased where a complainant is the owner of a well-known trademark, Fendi Adele S.r.l. v. ...
2012-10-03 - Case Details
Gleichzeitig verfügt der Beschwerdegegner über eine Vielzahl weiterer Domainnamen, die bekannte/berühmte Marken Dritter (wie z.B. „Mercedes“ oder „Sony“) einschließen. Dies lässt letztlich nur den Schluss zu, dass der Beschwerdegegner die streitigen Domainnamen in der Absicht registriert hat und nutzt, um hieraus einen wie auch immer gearteten (finanziellen) Vorteil zu ziehen, der auf der Bekanntheit/Berühmtheit der Marke VOLKSWAGEN fußt. ...
2015-02-24 - Case Details
According to the Complainant, its processors marketed under the Trademark are used as the main CPU for
most mobile telephones, including those manufactured by Apple, HTC, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, and Samsung,
in addition to providing the CPUs for many other widely used devices including laptops, tablets, televisions,
and other electronic products.
...
2022-08-30 - Case Details
That its processors are used as the main Central Processing Unit (“CPU”) for most mobile telephones, including those manufactured by Apple, HTC, Nokia, Sony Ericsson, and Samsung.
That it provides CPUs for many other devices, including laptops, tablets, and televisions.
...
2022-03-14 - Case Details
This homepage also displays the logos of HTC, CANON, APPLE, PALM, SONY, and HP but no products of any of these companies are offered for sale.
5. Parties’ Contentions
A. ...
2020-08-06 - Case Details
[…] Many such cases involve the respondent’s use of
the domain name to send deceptive emails, e.g., to obtain sensitive or confidential personal information from
prospective job applicants, or to solicit payment of fraudulent invoices by the complainant’s actual or
prospective customers” (in this respect see, for example, Sony Corporation v. WhoisGuard Protected,
WhoisGuard, Inc. / David Grant, WIPO Case No. D2020-3162; Haas Food Equipment GmbH v. ...
2023-02-28 - Case Details
En atención a lo anterior, es difícil concebir un uso futuro que no tendiera a incrementar o aprovechar la similitud existente entre el nombre de dominio en disputa y la marca de la Promovente para fines ilegítimos (ver Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. sony.net,
Caso OMPI No. D2000-1074).
Conforme a la evidencia aportada por la Promovente, ésta notificó a la Titular una carta de cese y desistimiento el 30 de noviembre de 2017, en la que informó a la Titular, su inconformidad con el registro del nombre de dominio en disputa incorporando su marca BERONIA, requiriendo la transferencia del nombre de dominio en disputa. ...
2018-05-17 - Case Details
The Panel
recognizes
that in
numerous
proceedings,
a distinctive
mark in
its entirety
incorporated
in a domain
name has
been found
to render
the domain
name confusingly
similar
to the distinctive
mark in
question
(inter
alia,
Minnesota
Mining &
Manufacturing
v. JonLR,
WIPO
Case No.
D2001-0428,
Sony
Corporation
v. Park
Kwangsoo,
WIPO
Case No.
D2001-0167).
The Panel
finds that
the addition
of the suffixes
"magizine",
"liv",
"cheets"
and "chaets"
does not
prevent
the possibility
of confusion.
...
2003-08-21 - Case Details
Quantum Computer Services Inc, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0794, , and Celine Dion and Sony
Music Entertainment (Canada) Inc. v. Jeff Burgar operating or carrying on business
as Celine Dion Club, WIPO Case No. ...
2004-12-20 - Case Details
But marks of this kind lack the distinctiveness of invented words, like KODAK, SONY or MICROSOFT because it is necessary to identify the field of use (such as computers in relation to the word APPLE) before it can be appreciated that they are being used as trademarks and not as common descriptive words. ...
2001-03-20 - Case Details
Complainant states that Respondent’s domain name resolves to a website that contains links and directs people to websites, including sites advertising and selling products of Complainant’s direct competitors such as Sony and Toshiba.
Respondent is using the domain name in dispute which is confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademarks for or including GATEWAY to attract people who are interested in Complainant’s computers, and diverting them to sites advertising and selling computers of Complainant’s competitors. ...
2008-03-26 - Case Details