I don't understand why the respondent isn't working on re-branding his investment.
P.
Philipp this has been mentioned before but the whole argument here is who owns the name britainsgottalent.co.uk. This name was chosen for an original online talent agency, Fremantle knew the name was registered and they knew the site was in development. They have schemed, used and manipulated the Nominet system.
The "Expert" decision is totally one-sided and she has found on the basis that an imaginary income has been made,
(even although she had a signed statement that no monies had been made by the sites owners) and when if she would have tried to actually complete the process she relies on for her decision she would have found out it could not be done and NOTHING has been made.
This finding if allowed to go on
makes a complete mockery of Nominet and the way the public and independent Nominet members actually feel about an in-house procedure that cannot remain neutral.
When the Editor of The Times newspaper came out and said their accusation against the owner was a LIE. Why were they not found
GUILTY of making a claim in
"BAD FAITH" and the decision made for the owner??.
The idea predates the show by 18 months, the registration predates the show by a year - So please dont anyone else suggest this, if you knew some of the things that went on you would realise just how dirty big business is in the UK.
This show was originally going to be called Paul O'Grady's Got Talent -
How successful do you think it would have been then, and why was it changed??