Bodog.com is no more!

[jhansen]

http://www.shoemoney.com/2007/08/28/bodog-poker-website-down-in-judgement/

Earlier today the Bodog website (bodog.com) went down. Many people thought it was just technical issues. A good friend inside Bodog pinged me and told me that the site was actually yanked out from under Bodog’s hands earlier today.

Apparently, some guy in the US who was awarded a patent for something to do with taking bets online filed a lawsuit against Bodog awhile back. Bodog didn’t respond because they are not a US company. So a judge awarded a default judgment of 50 million.

Yesterday, the guy with the judgment used it to seize control of Bodog’s domain names from Enom. Almost all of their sites are now offline, and now they are going to loose all of their SERPS.

I am sure this will make some big news tomorrow. You can see Calvin's explanation here.

So if your looking for bodog here is the new bodog.

Crazy eh?

 

[Mike]

Somehow this newsbit in comparison to Calvin's statement is a bit contradictory. Calvin says:

This is the result of a legal dispute over the ownership of the Bodog.com domain name.

While the news regarding this development are:

Apparently, some guy in the US who was awarded a patent for something to do with taking bets online filed a lawsuit against Bodog awhile back.

and this comment:

The company in question is 1st Technology LLC, the judgement was handed down in King County. The total amount for the judgement was $49M (approx.) now the sketchy thing her is that generally only WIPO resolves domain disputes.
1st Technologies LLC is well known for going after gaming companies for their patent on “internet casino”

Somehow, the judgement doesn't seem to have anything to do with the Domain Name, while Calvin is pointing towards Domain Ownership issues. Someone is either totally misinformed or is trying to put some sort of spin on the situation that is going to come back to bite them in the arse.

Anyone know what's really going on?

IB

 

[jhansen]

More Coverage

Mel Molnick Steals Bodog.com

Ayre's trademarked Bodog.com brand joins a long list of other internet gambling related domain names that have been targets to Molnick including Ladbrokes.com, Sportingbet.com, Betsson.com, BetInternet.com and CasinoWebCam.com.

The biggest difference with Bodog is that the name is a registered trademarked owned by Calvin Ayre for years. So a precedent setting legal battle over the rights to the Bodog.com domain name could be looming on the horizon. However, it might prove to be more cost effective for Ayre to reach a settlement with football starting this upcoming weekend, clearly something that Melnick's legal advisers were planning on when they went after the most recognized brand in the internet gambling industry on Monday.

 

[DNQuest.com]

Many people say "Don't respond" or ask "What could happen?".. well, here is a great example of not responding to a lawsuit... default judgement. This is not a domain case, but if someone uses ACPA instead of WIPO to claim thier domain and are awarded a default judgement with monetary awards, they can go after any and all your assets.

 

[Mike]

Internet extortion for a patented process rather than a physical product? That's beyond neat. Let's patent the sales process of online goods, shall we?
Now, if i'm reading and interpreting this correctly, then this Mel Molnick guy has found a niche where he can practically tie everyone that has a Bodog like outfit into a lawsuit that will cost the defending company more in lost revenue, brand recognition, marketing and other efforts than the eventual settlement that's being worked out.
I'm not sure if i should applaud this guy for (ab)using the system or to be plainly disgusted. Actually, on second thought, the latter is the case.

IB

 

[DNQuest.com]

Let's patent the sales process of online goods, shall

IB

It has been done...



I do believe the patents should be recinded. But if no one challenges it, it is still there, and in the eyes of the law, they have every right to protect it.

 

[Domagon]

From my understanding, jurisdiction in regards to domain name assets can be based on the location of the registrant (obvious) and/or based on the location of the registrar ... eNom is a U.S. based company.

In theory, the jurisdiction for all .COM domains could be the U.S., but from my understanding that's not how it works since it's registrars who interact with registrants not the registry.

On an aside, becoming one's own registrar is more affordable and easier than ever - definitely something any entity that relies on their domains for business, if it's a type that involves much legal exposure, should consider.

Ron

 

[Spade]

I found an article that I feel explains the situation better than the rest:

http://www.point-spreads.com/industry/082907-opportunist-mel-molnick-steals-bodog.com-domain.html

Its all about money and timing. And of course these ridiculous "process patents"... Good luck to Bodog.com - I have no doubt they are going to pay this ransom.

Jusin

 

[Jeffrey]

1. So this Melnick dude could get any of my domains or websites by filing a lawsuit in a US court against me even if i live in the Philippines?!

2. He could be successful especially if my domains are registered in a US based registrar?

 

[RazorNF]

Its all about money and timing. And of course these ridiculous "process patents"... Good luck to Bodog.com - I have no doubt they are going to pay this ransom.
Jusin

Reminds me of the RIM ordeal, where the dispute almost lead to the shutting down of blackberry service in the US.

Forget principles or who's right, of course they will pay - they will lose more money if they don't.

 

[louddrums]

Can anyone provide a list of offshore registrars that would not recognize the patents - some of us need to move our gambling domains off of US-based registrars. I would hate to have a broad stroke order issued with a list of names being locked up... I know it sounds improbable, but hey look at what happened to Bodog....

 

[DNQuest.com]

no no no, you guys are missing the point. The patent and the domain have nothing to do with each other. What happen, the patent holder sued Bodog in court. Bodog did not respond to teh lawsuit, the patent holder won a judgement. This is a patent case. Now, it is up to teh patent holder to collect the damages, so what he did, he took the awarded damages and went after assets that he could. So he went after the domain.

This does not affect anyone else at all. Now if the patent holder goes after other casinos, I am more than willing to bet they WILL respond. This happened because Bodog felt they did not need to respond in a US Court, that was their mistake. Bodog would have been better off challenting the process patent instead of sitting on their arses saying, "can't touch this"

So stop panicking, no one is coming after you casino domains.

 

[lpstong]

Ok so he was awarded the domain based on a patent he has with the word bodog. I did a google search and of course the 1st 9 pages are all regarding the lawsuit. The 10th is on bodog music and how prosperous of a year it has had. Ok nvm that was calvin as well.

But curious so is the name bodog and the patent have a product and or service? I am a wee bit curious what the patent is on. Just the name or something else?

 

[Dave_Z]

From my understanding, jurisdiction in regards to domain name assets can be based on the location of the registrant (obvious) and/or based on the location of the registrar

Or the location of the Registry. US-based registrar or not, it doesn't matter if
a .com is involved since the .com Registry is under US jurisdiction.

 

[Domagon]

As I mentioned already in my previous reply ... the .COM registry interacts with registrars only not registrants.

Registrants interact with their respective registrar(s) ... and thus, from my understanding, it's the location of the registrar that matters in many instances in regards to jurisdiction over domain name issues.

Ron

 

[DNQuest.com]

Ok so he was awarded the domain based on a patent he has with the word bodog.

No. please read. The patent is on the betting process online. They went after Bodog. The damages was because Bodog infringed on the patent of online betting. It has nothing to do with teh word Bodog. But the domain is an asset and they seized it to satisfy the monetary judgement the patent holder won by default.

As I mentioned already in my previous reply ... the .COM registry interacts with registrars only not registrants.

Registrants interact with their respective registrar(s) ... and thus, from my understanding, it's the location of the registrar that matters in many instances in regards to jurisdiction over domain name issues.

Ron

I think the asset is held at the registry, but only processed by a registrar. So all .coms are based in the US.

 

[Dave_Z]

As I mentioned already in my previous reply ... the .COM registry interacts with registrars only not registrants.

Registrants interact with their respective registrar(s) ... and thus, from my understanding, it's the location of the registrar that matters in many instances in regards to jurisdiction over domain name issues.

Ron

I read you, Ron. What I really meant to say (which I should have worded right
from the start) is the complaining party can go for the Registry if the registrar
doesn't respond.

In any case, the party made the right decision to approach the registrar. Less
hassles for everyone concerned...except Ayre.

 

[labrocca]

I think you are all giving Phil an aneurysm.

For those asking about outside U.S. registrars...hmm..1&1 comes to mind.

 

[Broker]

LOL, on the "newbodog" site, it says under "bodog" "online betting at bodog"

 

[Domagon]

See this article for some discussion of jurisdiction relating to ICANN and Registries.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement/0,1000000308,39284034,00.htm

In particular note the last paragraph of that article explaining how neither ICANN nor the registry may have authority to act upon court orders regarding ceasing / disabling specific domain names.

"The court could make an order to the registry that holds the DNS, which is the Public Interest Registry, based in Virginia. But we think they would take the same course as ICANN — that they don't have the authority," Cox added.

Ron