The Policy was designed specifically to deal with the problem of cybersquatting, which is defined as a pattern of registration and misuse of disputed domain names and may constitute evidence of bad faith registration and use of the domain pursuant to paragraph 4(b)(ii) of the Policy. See Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Anderson, NAF Claim No. 198809 (finding a pattern of registering domain names in bad faith pursuant to paragraph 4(b)(ii) of the Policy where a respondent previously registered domain names incorporating well-known third party trademarks); see also N.H. ...
2010-11-29 - Case Details
Rights or Legitimate Interests
The Policy requires that a complainant must prove each of the elements in paragraph 4(a) and it might be thought that proving the negative (that the respondent does not enjoy some right or legitimate interest in the domain name at issue) could pose particular difficulties for the Complainant, but it is generally accepted that once a complainant had made a prima facie case that the respondent does not have rights or legitimate interests, it is for the respondent to rebut such prima facie case by demonstrating its rights or legitimate interests in the domain name. The Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Sony.net,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1074 is an apt case that discusses this very point. ...
2010-11-08 - Case Details
The Complainant relies upon a number of previous WIPO decisions in support of its contention:
Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Kil Inja, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1409 (addition of descriptive word to a world-famous mark
does not detract from the overall impression of the famous mark),
America Online, Inc v. ...
2004-05-03 - Case Details
site are American Express, Apple, Colgate-Palmolive, Disney, The Gap, Honda, IBM, Lego, Microsoft, Procter & Gamble, Sony, Swatch, Toshiba, and Visa.
- [29] Nearly all of Yahoo!’s current Internet services are offered to the public free of charge, its income being primarily derived from the sale of advertising and co-branding or sponsorship agreements with other companies. ...and GEOCITIES 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
iii)that the Domain
Name has been registered and is being used in bad faith.
6.13It has been held
in earlier Panel decisions that mere registration of a trademark or famous mark
as a Domain Name, by an entity which has no relationship to the mark, is sufficient
evidence of bad faith registration and use. (See Sony Kabushiki Kaisha a/t
Sony Corp. v. Fujiko Kikuno, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1372; Sigla Sistema Globo de Gravacoes Audio Visuais Ltd.
...
2001-12-10 - Case Details
“The addition
of “my” is not sufficient to avoid confusion.” Sony Kabushiki
Kaisha v. Sin, Eonmok, WIPO Case
No. D2000-1007 (November 16, 2000) (transferring the domain name ).
...
2006-07-18 - Case Details
D2000-0003;
Compaq Computer Corp. v. Boris Beric, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0042; Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja Kil, WIPO
Case No. D2000-1409.
In previous WIPO UDRP decisions, relevant circumstances were held to include the reputation of Complainant’s trademark and its use internationally, and the Respondent’s failure to provide evidence of any actual or contemplated good faith use by it of the domain name. ...
2006-04-10 - Case Details
V.S. International,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0664 and Sony Corporation v. John Stewart Last, Dragon Domains Limited,
WIPO Case No. D2008-0812).
The Domain Name Has Been Registered or Is Being Used In Bad Faith
Complainants have argued that this is a clear case of “typo-squatting”. ...
2009-01-06 - Case Details
The Complainant furnished evidence showing that the Respondent is the owner of, or has owned, at least 22 domain names that contain trade marks such as BOTOX, ERICSSON, FIFA, IPHONE, NOKIA, EBAY, SONY and MICROSOFT.
5. Parties' Contentions
A. Complainant
The Complainant contends that:
1. The disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the BLACKBERRY trade marks in which the Complainant has and continues to have rights. ...
2009-03-31 - Case Details
FA109699; eBay, Inc v. Akram Mehmood,
WIPO Case No. DAE2007-0001 and Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications International AB and Others v. Mohamed Ali Aal Ali,
WIPO Case No. DAE2006-0002.
5.A.10 As to registration in bad faith, in addition to the well-known status of the BASKIN ROBBINS trademarks and the registered trademarks set out in paragraph 4.A.2 above, the Complainant points to the Respondent's false representation and warranty in Clause 4.3 of the Registration Agreement whereunder he warranted that neither of the disputed domain names would infringe the rights of any third party. ...
2009-09-28 - Case Details
The Complainant's Nick domain names
4.1.6 The Complainant launched its “www.nick.com” website in December 1996 which offers video games through links to Nick Arcade: Nick.Com New Game Of The Week: Free Games: Nick.Com's Video Game Insider: Nicktropolis; and a link to over 500 free games.
4.1.7 The “www.nick.com” website also links to “www.shop.nick jr.com”, through which a variety of toys and games can be purchased, including a wide variety of video games in the major gaming formats supported by Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo, as well as its other formats.
4.2 The Respondent
4.2.1. In the absence of Response all that is known of the Respondent, whose address is in Moscow, Russian Federation, is what is set out in the Complaint.
4.2.2 The Respondent has been a respondent in two proceedings brought under the Policy. ...
2008-08-15 - Case Details
D2000-0716 (the absence of a letter “s” from a domain name “do[es] not change the overall impression engendered”); and Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Sin,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1007 (transfer of ).
Therefore, the Panel is convinced that Complainant has proven the first element of the Policy.
...
2007-11-12 - 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 authorized the Respondent to use the domain name. ...
2007-11-01 - Case Details
Além disso, o Especialista conclui que a adição do sufixo constituído pela expressão “.com” ao nome de domínio não é, de modo algum, suficiente para diferenciar ou distinguir o nome de domínio em disputa em relação às marcas MASTERCARD registadas pela Demandante, tal como já ficou demonstrado e decidido no caso Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. sony.net,
Caso OMPI No. D2000-1074.
Por tudo isto o Especialista conclui que o nome de domínio em disputa é idêntico ou semelhante às marcas da Demandante.
...
2011-07-28 - Case Details
Van Johns), QTK Internet/Name Proxy/Private Registration,
WIPO Case No. D2011-0637; Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Damian Macafee/QTK Internet,
WIPO Case No. D2009-1134, and cases cited therein; Microsoft Corporation v. ...
2015-01-05 - Case Details
GA Modefine SA v. Yonghui Huang,
WIPO Case No. D2008-0355; Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja, Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409; Florida Department of Management Services v. ...
2013-04-30 - 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. ...
2022-09-15 - Case Details
[…] Muchos de estos casos implican
el uso por parte de la demandada del nombre de dominio para el envío de mensajes engañosos, p.e. para
obtener información personal sensible o confidencial de solicitantes de puestos de trabajo o para solicitar
fraudulentamente a clientes reales o potenciales de la demandante el pago de facturas”3 (en este sentido,
ver, por ejemplo, Sony Corporation v. WhoisGuard Protected, WhoisGuard, Inc. / David Grant, Caso OMPI
No. D2020-3162; Haas Food Equipment GmbH v. ...
2022-12-05 - Case Details
除争议域名之外，被投诉人还曾注册其他包含第三方知名商标的域名，比如包含 HUAWEI 商标的域名
、包含 NIKE 商标的域名、包含 SONY 商标的域名
。
此外，争议域名曾指向出售该争议域名的不同网页，比如销售平台 Dan.com 的网页在醒目位置显示争议域名
正在以 6,000 美元的价格出售，并设置了“Buy now”（立即购买）链接。...
2023-06-01 - Case Details
The Panel finds that the addition of an ordinary descriptive word “service” to the trademark KENT / KENT RO of the Complainants does not avoid a finding of confusing similarity between the disputed domain name and the Complainants’ trademark. See, Sony Kabushiki Kaisha v. Inja Kil,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1409.
The Panel accordingly finds that the requirement of paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy stands satisfied by the Complainants.
...
2020-05-22 - Case Details