Comments

• (Ceo 01:13 am 30-Sep-2014 Note.. The last URS case Yoyo won ( 2 weeks ago Examiner was a former judge) This case on submitting exactly same facts it’s lost (Examiner commercial TM lawyer), make from this what you will. It looks like the Examiner didn’t even read the response which included an associated lawsuit filed in Arizona, no reference was made to it whatsoever. The URS system was designed to help tackle clear cut cases of trademark and domain name misuse and that the URS was not intended for use in proceedings with open questions of fact, contestable issues or more involved legal scenarios. How’s a lawsuit filed in a Federal court not a constable issue? Amongst other spurious findings the Examiner finds “Registrant cannot seriously pretend that he can use third parties ‘trademarks to create domain names under .EMAIL, alleging that his business model that consists of offering an email directory is legitimate” Yoyo has does not “pretend” to use its domain names, it does use them. The finding is purely subjective and naïve because the lawyer has no entrepreneurial vision. The finding is not based on UDRP rules, state law or facts. This is not a neutral statement, is a statement full of contempt and naivety. If not, then its deliberate wrongdoing, Examiner cannot have it both ways. Rules are being ignored and it is clear evidence of abuse of discretion, misuse of one's powers and decision-making facilities, driven by a culture of impunity. Note that the Complainants lawyer in this case is also a WIPO examiner and works as a TM lawyer in Paris and so is the Examiner a TM lawyer who also works in Paris. And, I am meant to believe the process is a totally independent and neutral system, of course it is. It wouldn’t surprise me if both commercial TM lawyers contacted each other before determination. Its corrupt. (CEO Yoyo.Email Ltd)