Monssen,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0275; Pfizer Inc. v. Order Viagra Online,
WIPO Case No. D2002-0366 (citing many panel decisions that found passive holding to constitute bad faith use).
7. ...
2011-01-14 - Case Details
He provides a list of these by way of example:
“Disney, CocaCola, Microsoft, Samsung, Toyota, Budweiser, Mercedes, Netflix, Starbucks, Gillette, Realtor,
Olympics, HarleyDavidson, Heineken, HelloKitty, iPhone, Jeep, Viagra, Nintendo, Porsche, StarWars,
WordPress, YouTube, and so on.”
The Respondent does not claim that the Complainant’s trademark was on this list but instead claims he also
undertook a “spot-check” of the United States Patent Trademark Office’s TESS database and
“Trademarkia.com”.
...
2022-04-28 - Case Details
Martin Marketing, WIPO Case No. D2002-0793; Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. #1 Viagra
Propecia Xenical & More Online Pharmacy, WIPO Case No. D2003-0793; WhatsApp Inc. v. Private Whois,
supra).
...
2023-10-30 - Case Details
Phillip Pizzurro,
WIPO Case No. D2004-0600; Pfizer Inc. v. Generic Viagra Pills,
WIPO Case No. D2004-0592; Pfizer Inc. v. Asia Ventures, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. D2005-0256; Pfizer Inc. v. ...
2017-02-08 - Case Details
Martin Marketing,
WIPO Case No. D2002-0793 and Hofmann-La Roche Inc. v. #1 Viagra Propecia Xenical & More Online Pharmacy,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0793. Likewise, the insertion of the hyphens between the words does not alter the fact that the Domain Names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark. ...
2016-01-22 - Case Details
Intermeds, LTD/ John Velasquez,
WIPO Case No.D2005-0153 which stated that “finding the domain shopviagra.com differed from the VIAGRA trademark only in the descriptive term “shop” and that “none of these integers [additional words] alone would preclude the disputed domain name from being confusingly similar”.
...
2017-05-12 - Case Details
Li Pinglong,
WIPO Case No. D2016-2269; Pfizer inc. v. Blue Viagra,
WIPO Case No. D2004-0732).
The first requirement of the UDRP is therefore satisfied.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
A complainant must then demonstrate that the respondent should be considered as having no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the disputed domain name that is the subject of the complaint (paragraph 4(a)(ii) of the Policy).
...
2018-08-17 - Case Details
Previous UDRP Panels have consistently held that persons who use marks in connection with what may be the genuine goods and services of the trademark owner are not entitled on that basis alone to register and use domain names containing the trademark, and particularly not where the domain name is used in connection with the promotion of goods or services other than those of the Complainant. See, for example: Hoffman-La Roche Inc. v. Viagra Propecia Xenical & More Online Pharmacy,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0793 and Motorola, Inc. v. NewGate Internet, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. ...
2007-09-13 - Case Details
The
Training Shed, WIPO Case No. D2003-0644
and Pfizer Inc. v. Blue Viagra, WIPO Case No.
D2004-0732 and precedents indicated).
The facts of the matter can be summarized as follows:
The Complainant is the largest real estate agency on the Costa Del Sol and the Costa Blanca in Spain. ...
2005-01-14 - Case Details
Any use that even a reseller may inevitably make of a trade mark does not necessarily extend to the right to incorporate that trademark into a domain name without authorization (Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. #1 Viagra Propecia Xenical & More Online Pharmacy,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0793: "[...] a reseller does not have the right to incorporate the trade mark of the resold goods into the domain name of the reseller". ...
2015-11-16 - Case Details
Previous UDRP Panels have consistently held that persons who use marks in connection with what may be the genuine goods and services of the trade mark owner are not entitled on that basis alone to register and use domain names containing the trade mark, and particularly not where the domain name is used in connection with the promotion of goods or services other than those of the Complainant. See, for example: Hoffman-La Roche Inc. v. Viagra Propecia Xenical & More Online Pharmacy,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0793 and Motorola, Inc. v. NewGate Internet, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. ...
2007-09-13 - Case Details
As explained by the Panel in Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. #1 Viagra Propecia Xenical & More Online Pharmacy,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0793, “[w]here a [c]omplainant alleges facts tending to prove that the [r]espondent offers products in a fashion that puts the public health at risk, it is especially appropriate to draw adverse inferences against a respondent who fails to respond. ...
2010-11-12 - Case Details
The websites carry the heading “Canadian Healthcare” alongside an image in the shape of a blue Viagra tablet with a Canadian maple leaf inset. The websites provide pricing in USD, UK£ and Euros for United States, United Kingdom, German, Italian and French markets according to the “Choose language” options available on the website. ...
2011-06-29 - Case Details
D2004-0730 (October 17, 2004) (concluding that the mark VIAGRA
was so obviously connected with the complainant and its products, that its use
by respondent to market the generic equivalent constituted “opportunistic
bad faith”), citing First American Funds, Inc. v. ...
2005-02-25 - Case Details
D2002-0605 (September 11, 2002); Pfizer Inc. v. Order Viagra Online,
WIPO Case No. D2002-0366 (July 11, 2002);
L.F.P., Inc. v. B and J Props., NAF Case No. ...
2005-01-06 - Case Details
Forum October 14, 2002); AT&T Corp, cited supra;
Pfizer Inc. v. Order Viagra Online, WIPO
Case No. D2002-0366 (July 11, 2002); L.F.P., Inc. v. B and J Props.,
FA 109697 (Nat. ...
2005-01-06 - Case Details
Entertainment Hosting
Services, Inc., NAF FA0204000110783, finding the domain name viagra-propecia-xenical-celebrex-claritin-prescriptions.com
confusingly similar to the complainant’s mark CELEBREX despite the inclusion
of the trademarks owned by the complainant’s competitors, noting that
“this presents a unique situation since the domain name appears to
infringe on the rights of multiple trademark holders, but only one party can
hold registration of the domain name”).
...
2005-01-06 - Case Details
Even resellers of trade marked goods may not have a right to register and use domain names containing the trade mark (e.g., Hoffman-La Roche Inc. v. #1 Viagra Propecia Xenical & More Online Pharmacy,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0793; and Oki Data Americas, Inc. v. ...
2008-10-14 - Case Details
Previous UDRP Panels have consistently held that persons who use marks in connection with what may be the genuine goods and services of the trademark owner are not entitled on that basis alone to register and use domain names containing the trademark, and particularly not where the domain name is used in connection with the promotion of goods or services other than those of the Complainant. See, e.g., Hoffman-La Roche Inc. v. #1 Viagra Propecia Xenical & More Online Pharmacy,
WIPO Case No. D2003-0793, Motorola, Inc. v. NewGate Internet, Inc.,
WIPO Case No. ...
2007-09-21 - Case Details
In the middle of the page were a series of “Sponsored Links” most of which relate to treatments for insomnia but some of which also purport to have some connection with the pharmaceutical Viagra.
4.7 As at the date when these proceedings were referred to the Panel, no web-page or website appears to be operating from the Domain Name. ...
2008-03-03 - Case Details