Geoffrey Onyeama, Deputy Director General, Development Sector
James Pooley, Deputy Director General, Innovation and Technology Sector
Binying Wang, Deputy Director General, Brands and Designs Sector
Christian Wichard, Deputy Director General, Global Issues Sector
Trevor C. Clarke, Assistant Director General, Copyright
Ambi Sundaram, Assistant Director General, Administration and Management Sector
Yoshiyuki (Yo) Takagi, Assistant Director General, Global Infrastructure
Naresh Prasad, Chief of Staff
James Pooley and Eric Wilber Spoke with Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox and are FULLY aware of Massive Liabilities to WIPO regarding Peter L. Michaelson WIPO Panelist.
I, Crystal L. Cox in my Pro Se Capacitcy continue to Demand a Copy of Peter L. Michaelson's Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence ALLEGEDLY, and Certified to me as being submitted to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center.
WIPO Emailed me this statement long ago and before this CONFLICTED WIPO Decision was made "In accordance with Rules, Paragraph 7, the above Panelist has submitted a Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center." . Yet WIPO Refuses to provide this Document to Pro Se Defendant Respondent Crystal L. Cox and Pro Se Defendant Respondent Eliot Bernstein, iViewit Technologies.
"Open Letter to WIPO Director Francis Gurry and Edward Kwakwa,
WIPO Legal Counsel (OLC) From Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox
WIPO Legal Counsel (OLC) From Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox
Regarding Notice and Reporting of Fraud, Criminal Activity, Rico Conspiracy, WIPO Panelist Conflict of Interest and Pending Criminal and Civil charges against WIPO. This is Regarding WIPO Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson and Regarding WIPO Cases (EP) D2012-1525 (Complainant Marc Randazza) and (TG) D2011-0678, (CT) D2011-0679,(CT) D2011-0677, (CT) D2011-0675 (Complainant Proskauer Rose)
From: Pro Se Defendant Crystal L. Cox of Case CV-11-57-HZ U.S. District Court, District of Oregon, Case 2:12-mc-00017-JPH Eastern District of Washington , Case 2:12-cv-02040-GMN-PA District of Nevada. Respondent of WIPO Cases (EP) D2012-1525 (Complainant Marc Randazza) and (TG) D2011-0678, (CT) D2011-0679,(CT) D2011-0677, (CT) D2011-0675 (Complainant Proskauer Rose)
1. The Parties to this WIPO Notice of Fraud, Conflict of Corruption,
and Criminal Activity are as follows:
The Complainant is Marc J. Randazza of Las Vegas, Nevada, represented by Randazza Legal Group of which Marc Randazza owns. The Complainant was an Attorney, at one time for the Respondent as emails proved to WIPO Panel.
The Respondents were Reverend Crystal Cox, Crystal L. Cox of Washington State. And iViewit Technology Founder, and one of the iViewit Technology Inventors Eliot Bernstein of Boca Raton, Florida.
The WIPO Sole Panelist who wrote the WIPO Decision in this matter is Peter L. Michaelson. Peter L. Michaelson has undisclosed connections to Proskauer Rose Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein, Ex-Supreme Court Judge Judith Kaye, MPEG LA and More.
This letter is to inform Francis Gurry and Edward Kwakwa, WIPO Legal Counsel of serious conflicts of interest, criminal activity, discrimination, and fraud within WIPO. This letter will be sent to WIPO Executives and Legal Counsel Members, as well as be posted online for Public Viewing.
This letter is also a Demand for a Retraction of Criminal Accusations. And a Demand for a Special Investigation by all proper authorities governing WIPO, RICO Conspiracy, International Fraud, Criminal, Collusion, and Intellectual Property Matters.
WIPO Director General Francis Gurry
and Edward Kwakwa, WIPO Legal Counsel,
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO),
Geneva, Switzerland
My Name is Crystal L. Cox, I am the victim of WIPO Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson regarding a recent WIPO Decision Case (EP) D2012-1525.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has defamed me and iViewit Founder / Inventor Eliot Bernstein. Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has massive, undisclosed conflicts of interest in this WIPO decision.
In this WIPO case Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has accused me, Respondent Crystal L. Cox and Eliot Bernstein of the Crime of Extortion. This is now a massive criminal and civil liability to WIPO. I demand that you report this to your insurance provider, your board of directors, and your shareholders immediately.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson knows that Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox was not under criminal investigation for Extortion, and Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson knows that Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox has had no criminal charges filed, no criminal trial, and certainly no criminal conviction of any kind. Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox was not on trial for Extortion nor has Respondent Eliot Bernstein nor Crystal Cox had a criminal extortion complaint filed. Yet Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson flat out states that Respondent Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox are guilty of the crime of extortion.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson accused Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox of the Crime of Extortion in a WIPO decision that is now picked up by Big Media, Countless Bloggers and is published globally in legal documents, dockets, intellectual property blogs magazines, and more. Therefore, Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has massively defamed Respondent Crystal Cox and Eliot Bernstein, as well as interfered with ongoing iViewit Technology investigations by these false Criminal Allegations of iViewit Founder Eliot Bernstein.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson’s accusations in a distinguished WIPO Decision has massively defamed Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox. This has lead to character attacks, further defamation and incited hate toward Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson took the word of the Respondent Marc Randazza, a Las Vegas Porn Attorney, over the word and documented proof of Defendant Crystal Cox.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson did no fact check or investigation into the allegations of Extortion. Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson simply accused Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox of Extortion in a WIPO Decision.
WIPO is not a Criminal Investigation Court. WIPO is not a Judge and a Jury. Yet Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson took it upon himself to convict Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox of Extortion.
WIPO has essentially signed my US constitutional rights over to international law and left me with no Constitutional Rights over the widespread ramifications of this publication.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson refused to signed a Conflict of Interest Disclosure in the WIPO Decision regarding Marc Randazza of Randazza Legal Group against Crystal Cox and Eliot Bernstein. Respondent Crystal Cox requested that the WIPO Panel Sign a Conflict of Interest Disclosure. This request was sent to Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson by WIPO and yet was NOT Signed and returned to Respondent Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox.
I, Crystal L. Cox, in my Pro Se Capacity Demand a Copy of Peter L. Michaelson's Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence submitted to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center. "In accordance with Rules, Paragraph 7, the above Panelist has submitted a Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center." I have emailed WIPO with this request on several occasions and have been DENIED.
I have reason to believe that Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has massive conflicts of interest regarding iViewit, Proskauer Rose, MPEG LA, Judith Kaye, Patent Theft, Eliot Bernstein and more regarding Eliot Bernstein and the Journalism of Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox regarding ALL named in the iViewit SEC Complaint, RICO Complaint and Legal Action surrounding iViewit Technologies Video Technology Theft by Proskauer Rose Attorneys.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson worked at Bell Lab with Proskauer Rose Attorney Kenneth Rubenstein whom was the main Patent Attorney involved in the theft of the 13 Trillion Dollar iViewit Technology theft. Proskauer Rose Patent attorney, who is also the MPEG LA head patent attorney, is named in RICO Complaints, Patent Lawsuits, and more regarding the iViewit Technology and Eliot Bernstein.
Peter L. Michaelson knows that he has massive conflicts of interest regarding being a Sole Panelist reviewing Domain Names owned by iViewit Founder and one of the iViewit Inventors, Eliot Bernstein. Peter L. Michaelson knows that he has massive conflicts of interest regarding being a Sole Panelist reviewing Domain Names owned by Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox whom Peter L. Michaelson know has been reporting on the iViewit Technology theft for over 3 years. In fact, Peter L. Michaelson was a requested Panelist by Proskauer Rose Law Firm in WIPO Case (TG) D2011-0678, (CT) D2011-0679,(CT) D2011-0677, (CT) D2011-0675 (Complainant Proskauer Rose), regarding Domain Name Disputes with Proskauer Rose Lawyers and Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox. For proof of this, review the emails of that Case. If you can’t find a Copy, I have attached one to this Letter.
Sole WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has conflicts of interest with MPEG LA, whom is named in the Eliot Bernstein RICO Complaints, SEC Complaints and Technology Infringement. Sole WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has conflicts of interest with MPEG LA’s patent attorney Kenneth Rubenstein of Proskauer Rose Law Firm whom was the original Patent Attorney for iViewit and originally stole the 13 Trillion Dollar iViewit Technology.
Peter L. Michaelson is connected with Proskauer Rose in regard to the International Commission on Patent Disputes and the CPR Protocol on Determination of Damages in Arbitration. This too is an undisclosed Conflict of Interest.
Sole WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson is connected to ex-Supreme Court Judge Judith Kaye who is also named in RICO Complaints, SEC Complaint, Patent Lawsuits and more in the iViewit Technology theft. As Judith Kaye was involved in covering up the theft. This was connected to the fact that her Husband was a Proskauer Rose Lawyer at that time, whom is now deceased.
In WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525, Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson names Proskauer Rose, and discusses my investigative writing of Proskauer Rose, Bruce Sewell Apple General Counsel who was Intel General Counsel when the iViewit Technology was stolen and Time Warner in conspiracy over the iViewit Technology. Proskauer Rose, Bruces Sewell of Apple and Time Warner had nothing to do with WIPO Case Case No. D2012-1525.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson brings up this point in order to attempt to protect those involved in the iViewit Technology theft in which Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson is in conspiracy and serious conflict of interest with. Why name Proskauer Rose, Bruce Sewell of Apple and Time Warner in a decision for a Domain Name regarding a Porn Industry Attorney named Marc Randazza and Domain Names owned by Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox and iViewit Founder / Inventor Eliot Bernstein.
I, Crystal L. Cox, in my Pro Se Capacity AGAIN, Demand a Copy of Peter L. Michaelson's Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence submitted to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson used a New York Times article as Investigative Fact to Convict Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox of extortion in WIPO Decision.
David Carr of the New York Times wrote an article called, “When Truth Survives Free Speech”. This is an “Opinion” of a journalist for the New York Times. It is not fact and has many false accusations and information. Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson references this article in his defamatory, criminal WIPO Decision. An “article” in the New York Times, used as FACT in a decision for Intellectual Property Rights is not based in fact or in law. And in fact, is unlawful, illegal and WIPO is liable for his actions in this matter.
In my WIPO Complaint Response, I provided documentation to the FACT that there was no Extortion charges against me. I Provided eMail Communication between Attorney Marc Randazza and myself Defendant Crystal Cox. I even provided the WIPO Panelist with a Copy of an eMail from Marc Randazza to Defendant Crystal Cox, stating that he would represent me in my Appeal of Obsidian Finance Group V. Crystal Cox.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson deliberately ignored my proof, my documents of facts, and simply went on the stated the word of Complainant, Porn Attorney Marc Randazza.
Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson then went so far as to accuse me of a serious crime in a worldwide published WIPO Decision This is Illegal and WIPO is liable.
WIPO is not a Criminal Investigation Court and has no right to accuse me of a Crime in Published WIPO Decisions. In doing so, Sole Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has committed a Crime and has defamed me seriously. This has also caused me severe damage and backlash. I demand that WIPO publish a retraction of this Decision in no less than 3 major Media Outlets. And that WIPO retract this Defamatory, Criminal WIPO Decision.
Peter L. Michaelson has acted in conspiracy with Porn Attorney Marc Randazza in inciting Hate against Blogger Crystal Cox whom Marc Randazza was my attorney for a short time, and whom I Fired for acting unethically. Peter L. Michaelson has not reviewed the facts of this case, and instead Peter L. Michaelson has stated that Crystal Cox and Eliot Bernstein are guilty of Extortion.
WIPO showed extreme discrimination, prejudice and special favors to Marc Randazza throughout the process. WIPO even let Marc Randazza add several domain names to the WIPO complaint, BEFORE he even paid a filing fee. I demand that there be a special investigations of all emails from WIPO to Marc Randazza, from Peter L. Michaelson to Marc Randazza, and a thorough examination of all documentation I submitted proving my case and that there was no extortion charges against me.
In WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525, Peter L. Michaelson states
"Respondent’s actions in registering and using the disputed domain names may appear, at a first glance, to simply be a vehicle through which she provides advertising through pay-per-click sites, but on slightly closer examination are actually components of an artifice intended to extort funds from the Complainant and thus a pretext for a rather egregious variant of cybersquatting. As such, none of those actions can or will serve as a predicate upon which the Respondent can lawfully develop any rights or legitimate interests in any of the disputed domain names.”
Sole WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson flat out lies in saying these sites are pay per click that I receive revenue from. I have not received revenue from disputed names. Any ads placed on said Domain Names were places by the Registrar, Godaddy, and the Revenue was taken by Godaddy and NOT Respondent.
Sole WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson commits fraud and defamation in saying that Domain Names are “actually components of an artifice intended to extort funds from the Complainant”. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has no proof of Complainant being asked for money to remove blog post. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has no proof of Complainant giving money to Respondent. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has no proof what so ever of intention to “extort”. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson simply goes on the word of Unethical Porn Industry Attorney Marc J. Randazza.
WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson States:
“the Respondent’s intention, as reflected by the record, was never to solely provide, through her websites, speech critical of the Complainant. Rather, her objective in both registering and using the disputed names was apparently to engage in a rather sinister and tenacious scheme to extort money from the Complainant.”
This is a flat out false statement. The record shows that I purchased MarcRandazza.com on the same day that I had a Phone Meeting with Marc Randazza regarding representing me in my Obsidian Finance Group V. Crystal Cox, high profile Free Speech Case I was taking to the Ninth Court of Appeals. I did not post one word on that Blog until months later when I FIRED Marc Randazza and he had conspired with opposing counsel to STOP me from going to the NINTH with my Appeal. My “objective” was to EXPOSE an unethical, hypocritical, lying, crooked attorney and to WARN others whom may have Marc Randazza do them what he did to me. I did not ask for money to remove information. In fact Marc Randazza offered to buy MarcRandazza.com and email records that Peter L. Michaelson has seen, show that I rejected this offer and said that MarcRandazza.com was not for sale at ANY price. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson even saw an email where Respondent Marc Randazza says he did not mind me asking for a job, and that was the only reference of money that EVER Came UP. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson knows all of this and still Falsely accused me of Extortion in mass, high profile media.
WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson States:
“Specifically, the Respondent first posted negative and false commentary on her websites that was intentionally calculated to injure the Complainant’s on-line reputation and disrupt the Complainant’s business conducted through his law firm. Thereafter, the Respondent used those sites in a manner that apparently optimized their ranking on the Google search engine in order to increase their visibility and prominence on search results yielded through a Google search of the Complainant, thus likely exacerbating the injury caused to the Complainant.”
Again WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson flat out lies. I, Respondent posted “commentary” in order to expose Marc Randazza, to discuss my experience with Marc Randazza as an attorney. From there I got lots of tips, so I posted more information. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has no reason to believe that the “commentary” is false. As it is true to the absolute best of my knowledge and information.
WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has no right to flat out state the commentary to be false, as it was NOT false. And it certainly was not posted to then Extort Money from Marc Randazza. This makes no logical sense and has no records of proof.
And of course I “optimized” my “sites” that is the point of the internet. I am Media, and I get the stories found strong in the search, that is the point of the INTERNET. It is not some sinister extortion plot. I asked for and I received NO money from Marc Randazza. IN fact, WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has seen emails where Marc Randazza asked that I pay his expenses in representing me.
WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson flat out lies in stating that I “intentially calculated to injure Complainant”. I Intentionally wrote blog posts to expose what Marc Randazza had done to me, my experience with Marc Randazza and tips and information I had investigated and received regarding Marc Randazza and the Randazza Legal Group.
WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson States
“Once all this occurred, the Respondent then offered her reputational management services to the Complainant through which, for a considerable fee, she would remediate the Complainant’s on-line reputation by eliminating all the negative and false commentary of her own making and presumably also ceasing her use of the disputed domain names. Basically, for a price, she would undo the injury to the Complainant for which she was responsible for having created in the first place. This egregious conduct clearly constitutes bad faith under the Policy."
WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has defamed me and acted criminally in this statement as he falsely accused me of criminal activity. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has seen emails and records that prove that did NOT offer to “remediate” anything for a fee. I NEVER, EVER offered to eliminate any “commentary”. This is a flat out false, defamatory statement with malice as WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson had the emails and records proving this untrue. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson flat out lies hypothesizing in a WIPO decision that I claimed I would undo injury that I did for a fee. This is NOT True. I will NOT undo my blog posts for a price, and I never offered Such. My intention is to warn others potential clients on how dangerous and unethical that Marc Randazza and Randazza legal group is. There was no “price” offered. So WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson saying that “Basically, for a price, she would undo the injury to the Complainant for which she was responsible for having created in the first place.” this again is defamatory and I Demand WIPO issue a Retraction in major media sources.
In WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525, Peter L. Michaelson discusses Marc Randazza’s given name and “Mark”. Yet no Trademark Documents applied or were filed. And Marc Randazza goes by MarcoRandazza on Twitter, YouTube and his username on his own blog. There is no ™ on Marc Randazza’s Blog. And there was no proof given to WIPO of Marc Randazza’s “given name” as I believe his birth name is Marco Randazza and not Marc Randazza. Also note that this Marc Randazza is not the only Marc Randazza in the world and should not have a right to steal this intellectual property as the only rightful owner in the world.
In WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525, Peter L. Michaelson States:
“Third, the Respondent attempted to commercially benefit from registration of these names by offering “reputation management” services to the Complainant – through baiting the Complainant into an extortionate scheme.”
This is a flat out false claim, and is defamatory. I did not bait the Complainant, in fact Marc Randazza entered my life through channels other than me. Marc Randazza wanted to be my attorney in the biggest First Amendment Case out there at this time, and got very angry when I fired him as my Attorney and instead chose UCLA Professor Eugene Volokh.
In WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525, Peter L. Michaelson States:
“Specifically, once the Complainant declined her “reputation management” services, the Respondent then registered domain names that contained not only the Complainant’s surname, but also the personal names of his wife and three year old daughter, and then included falsehoods about the Complainant on her websites to which the domain names resolved.”
This is false and defamatory. I did not post falsehoods, nor did I start blogs to post falsehoods because Marc refused to pay me. I did not ask Marc Randazza to pay me to remove anything. My Blogs were to expose Marc Randazza. And there was NEVER a blog at the alleged domain of Marc Randazza’s alleged daughter. Peter L. Michaelson flat out lies.
In WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525, Peter L. Michaelson States:
“The Respondent would then eliminate such sites, and hence the ensuing injury to the Complainant’s reputation, only if the Complainant would purchase her “reputation management” services.”
This never happened, and Peter L. Michaelson has again defamed and flat out lied about Respondent Crystal Cox. I NEVER offered to eliminate anything, Peter L. Michaelson has no proof of this. Peter L. Michaelson went on the stated word of unethical Porn Attorney Marc J. Randazza and Peter L. Michaelson had no FACTS or proof of any kind as to this statement. This flat out did NOT happen.
In WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525, Peter L. Michaelson States:
“Further, the Respondent repeatedly engaged in the same general type of extortionate conduct by offering her “reputation management” services to others, including as her targets various business people and third-party attorneys, thus reflecting a pattern of such conduct.”
Sole WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has no proof of this being true. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has no right to discuss or speculate regarding any other content, story, person or company I report on in my media. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson was to determine a decision regarding WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525 and not to speculate on all the alleged “others” that he falsely believes I have allegedly extorted. I demand that WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525 Panelist Peter L. Michaelson issue a retraction regarding Respondent Crystal L. Cox, Immediately.
Based ONLY on the Word of Marc Randazza and not other evidence, Sole WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson States:
“Fourth, Respondent Cox exhibited bad faith in transferring ownership of some of the disputed domain names to Respondent Bernstein, who merely served as a proxy of the former, in an attempt to evade liability (via so-called “cyberflight”) under the Policy.”
WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson’s statements are false. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson should have looked at court records and proof of this before stating this defamatory and flat out false statement. Eliot Bernstein is NOT a Proxy. Eliot Bernstein owns a large portion of Domain Names I once owned. I have always owned and operated the blogs on those Domain Names. Eliot Bernstein was owed money by my, proof of this is in the court dockets.
Eliot Bernstein is being defamed here as well, for he is not nor has ever been a proxy. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson falsely accuses Eliot Bernstein and Crystal Cox of “Cyberflight”, which is simply not based in ANY Fact. Crystal Cox was, in no way attempting to evade liability. Said Domain Names are a constant liability, and a constant financial maintenance.
Page 2 of WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525 certifies this, "The Center appointed Peter L. Michaelson as the sole panelist in this matter on September 7, 2012. The Panel finds that it was properly constituted. The Panel has submitted the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with paragraph 7 of the Rules." Yet WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson has massive undisclosed conflicts and is NOT Impartial. WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson and WIPO officials refuse my requests for a copy of “the Statement of Acceptance and Declaration of Impartiality and Independence, as required by the Center to ensure compliance with paragraph 7 of the Rules”.
MarcRandazza.com rightfully belongs to Blogger Crystal Cox. MarcRandazza.com is a brand I created and is a domain name I got found strong in the search. Marc Randazza of Randazza Legal Group has no legal right to MarcRandazza.com.
MarcRandazza.com was not a commercial blog, it was a parody, a gripe site, a news outlet exposing an unethical attorney. MarcRandazza.com is the sole idea, invention and brand created by Internet Branding and SEO Expert Crystal Cox.
Marc Randazza of Randazza Legal Group conspired with WIPO Panelist Peter L. Michaelson to set up Crystal Cox and Eliot Bernstein for Extortion and to flat out accuse Crystal Cox and Eliot Bernstein of extortion in a widely published WIPO Decision. Marc Randazza of Randazza Legal Group also conspired with NPR, Forbes, PhillyLawBlog, PopeHate.com, Attorney Kenneth P. White, Judge Marco Hernandez and Obsidian V. Cox Opposing Counsel David S. Aman in order to make Respondent Crystal Cox look like an extortionist though I was not on trial for extortion. This was to pressure me to not take my Appeal to the Ninth and to make me look like a criminal and discredit me, as my case will make it so that Bloggers have the Same Legal Rights as Traditional Media / Journalists. Big Media is trying to stop my appeal, Marc Randazza has intimidated me to not appeal. Marc Randazza even advised me to NOT appeal and attempted to make deals behind my back in Obsidian V. Cox as my attorney, negotiated deals that I had no knowledge of.
I, Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox will be publicly posting this letter at my New Blog
FrancisGurry.com.
FrancisGurry.com was recently purchased by myself, Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox in order to expose the any possible Fraud, Deceit, Conflicts of Interest and possible corruption within the WIPO Organization.
FrancisGurry.com is not a commercial site. I will take NO Money for FrancisGurry.com. I will NOT remove ONE Word from FrancisGurry.com for Money.
The Object of FrancisGurry.com is to deeply investigate the WIPO organization and post information on a top of the search engines keyword rich domain name, which is the whole point of internet marketing for those of us who are Search Engine Marketing Experts.
FrancisGurry.com is a site of Public Interest and of Public Service. I will solicit tips, information, videos and documents in effort to investigative report on the WIPO Organization.
Crystal L. Cox
Pro Se Defendant, Pro Se Respondent
WIPO Decision Case No. D2012-1525"
Peter L. Michaelson, Francis Gurry, Erik Wilbers, Ignacio de Castro, Adam Rattray , David Roache-Turner, Leena Ballard , Francisco Ríos , Judith Schallnau, Leandro Emilio Toscano, Geoffrey Onyeama,James Pooley, Binying Wang, Christian Wichard, Trevor C. Clarke, Ambi Sundaram, Yoshiyuki (Yo) Takag, Naresh Prasad
No comments:
Post a Comment