DreamWorks Animation LLC v. Phivos Morides/Phoebus Morides
WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center
Case No. D2012-0054 (2012)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
DreamWorks Animation LLC (Animation) (plaintiff) held the worldwide trademarks to the word DREAMWORKS and the word with a graphic of a boy fishing from the moon (together, the dreamworks trademarks). Animation operated domain names like dreamworks.com and dreamworksanimation.com and had a policy of obtaining domain names that incorporated the word dreamworks. At some point after Animation was established and the dreamworks trademarks were registered, Phivos Morides/Phoebus Morides (Morides) (defendant) set up various companies that included the name Dreamworks, such as Dreamworks Incorporated (Middle East) Limited or Dreamworks Corp Worldwide (collectively, the Dreamworks entities). Morides ran some businesses using the name Dreamm or a variation of Dreamm and operated a website, dreamm-group.com. Morides then registered the domain names dreamworks-europe.com and dreamworks-worldwide.com (the disputed domain names). People who visited the disputed domain names were diverted or led to dreamm-group.com. Morides asserted that his enterprise, known as Dreamm Group Worldwide, was in the entertainment business and offered television programming. Animation claimed that Morides had violated the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) in registering the disputed domain names. Before the arbitration panel, evidence showed that the Dreamworks entities were defunct or had not ever been legally registered or operational and that Morides’s brand was Dreamm, not dreamworks. The matter was submitted for decision.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.