rileys.co.uk

[grandin]

public decision.. http://www.nominet.org.uk/digitalAssets/21873_rileys.pdf

 

[fred]

Quote of the day:

The Respondent has responded, but in an unusual style. The first part of the Response is devoted to a wide-ranging attack on Nominet, the Nominet DRS Policy and the approach of experts in various decisions.

:mrgreen:

 

[mally]

The complaint was dismissed if anyone wants to know!!

 

[olebean]

"at a non market value for a commercial gain”.

Erm, eh?

no amount of trade mark applications would have sufficed to deter a finding of Abusive Registration

Interesting!

 

[Beasty]

The complaint was dismissed if anyone wants to know!!

Well done Lee!

 

[grandin]

business as usual

Yes Fred, what is usual for Acorn is obviously not as usual for experts...

...Once upon a time, as part of a DRS consultation, a wise old expert wrote...

in-law a non defended complaint is judged in favour of the complainant

indeed...the expert failed to defend the attack element of my response

Lee

 

[Beasty]

Yes Fred, what is usual for Acorn is obviously not as usual for experts...

...Once upon a time, as part of a DRS consultation, a wise old expert wrote...

in-law a non defended complaint is judged in favour of the complainant

indeed...the expert failed to defend the attack element of my response

Lee

Strange that TW did not know you were Mr GHD!

 

[olebean]

Strange that TW did not know you were Mr GHD!

Didn't know or created distance between the role of expert and that of DRS supreme.. He did say, he didn't conduct any further research over and above that supplied by the complainant.."selective" research?

Lee

Congrats! Is it going to Appeal?

 

[grandin]

And

AND...

Interesting that the expert did not access the prss system between the complaint and the decision. I would assume the expert's firm does not subscribe to the prss...

Beasty, Nominet told me that a respondent or complainant can appeal a decision to have the appeal panel to answer procedural issues, saying that who wants to fork out £3k

Lee

 

[grandin]

I hope

I hope it goes to appeal so I can ask the appeal panel to address the first part of my response

Lee

 

[Beasty]

Didn't know or created distance between the role of expert and that of DRS supreme.. He did say, he didn't conduct any further research over and above that supplied by the complainant.."selective" research?

Lee

Congrats! Is it going to Appeal?

But he only had to remember it - he was the chair of that Appeal Panel!

 

[SF]

Well done Lee !

 

[olebean]

But he only had to remember it - he was the chair of that Appeal Panel!

Selective search..

 

[grandin]

very true

Indeed beasty....deliberate statement i thought...

given the importance of the ghd case and the fact the Mr T Willoughby had no problem recalling the verbatim appeal one would presume he knows the 3 million word contract better than most....indeed you would expect him to set an example for novice registrants i.e. remembering all facts contained within the extensive drs archive

One point was very misleading....Mr Willoughby was inferring that proof of sales, advertising literature would move their rights into a different league.....incorrect, if at the outset Mr T Willoughby doesn't know of the rights holder the complaint must fail as Mr Grandin may well be as bright as Mr T Willoughby i.e. not knowing about the rights holder as the point of registration

Indeed, I merely went through the telephone book....borin bugger!

Lee

 

[grandin]

thanks

thanks db, but i still get this awful feeling that someone is trying to corner me....two days ago i got a letter from a trade mark holder asking to buy the domain name for the golden £7500...bizarre or IP lawyer conspiracy? LOL

Lee

 

[GWing]

Nice one bud, at last a case that has changed my mind on the fact that not all DRS cases are completley bonkers.

GW

 

[grandin]

it helps

it helps to do a bit of slaggin off before coming to the response...it helps to focus the mind on the fact rights holder are not just money holders

Lee