Comments

• Peter 07:17 am 28-Jun-2014 REGISTRATION AND USE IN BAD FAITH 1, The Examiner Says: "Respondent has intentionally attempted to attract for commercial gain Internet users to the and web sites by creating a likelihood of confusion with the LOCKHEED and LOCKHEEDMARTIN marks". Where is the rest of URS rule? "as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation, or endorsement of Registrant’s web site or location or of a product or service on that web site or location". Why hasn't the correct legal test been applied correctly by the Examiner? EXAMINER FINDINGS OF FACT 2. What;s more weird. I noticed it wasn't the Complainant but the Respondent who talked of monetisation. Now why would the Respondent voluntarily admit an act of bad faith? Something is not quite right. It would be interesting in seeing the unedited version of the response. Interested observer. 28 June 2014