NBA's Chris Bosh uses Legal Action to get ChrisBosh.com and 800 other domains

**bwhhisc** · 10-17-2009, 06:45 AM

If you don't show up in court then the judge will no doubt send you a message:

**Stian** · 10-17-2009, 06:47 AM

Did this guy really have 800 (!) names related to Chris Bosh? Creepy.

**bwhhisc** · 10-17-2009, 06:57 AM

Originally Posted by pcproffenno

Did this guy really have 800 (!) names related to Chris Bosh? Creepy.

No, he had 800 different celebrity names plus his own name... which the judge took as well.

**Stian** · 10-17-2009, 07:01 AM

Originally Posted by bwhhisc

No, he had 800 different celebrity names plus his own name... which the judge took as well.

Oh, it sounded like the judge gave all these names to Chris Bosh. Chris Bosh; - the biggest celeb cybersquatter in the industry.

**Rubber Duck** · 10-17-2009, 12:02 PM

Seems to me justice has been served very well. If the tosser has backed-off he could have continued to profit from the name. Greed beyond belief!

Originally Posted by chris26

Not sure if any of you have seen this but it's kind of scary.

http://www.businessinsider.com/nbas-...others-2009-10

A domainer (called a "cybersquatter" in the article) bought several domains for up and coming athletes and celebrity children's names. After failing to show up for court, the judge awarded Toronto Raptor Chris Bosh nearly 800 domain names from the domainer’s portfolio. The article also includes the actual court order by the judge.

**PokerPie** · 10-24-2009, 09:56 PM

I can see how a judge could justify this: Instead of awarding him the domain+monetary damages, he just turns the portfolio over to Chris Bosh. Bosh could sue for damages as well as just the domain, maybe that is what happened.

I'm not giving my opinion on this one way or another, just playing devils advocate that there could be a justification for this.

Looks like I was right

A federal judge awarded Bosh $120,000, but believing Zavala wouldn't pay, Bosh's lawyers asked for the rights to the names Zavala had been using.

**RMF** · 10-29-2009, 06:40 PM

Another year or two, most of these names will likely expire and drop...

**pergamon** · 10-30-2009, 08:43 AM

Originally Posted by RMF

Another year or two, most of these names will likely expire and drop...

I many ways I think this case is unique. Chris Bosch probably opted to sue this guy because so many of his fellow player friends were squatted on too. So, they couldn't put all those names in 1 WIPO because there was no connection between the names. Suing in court was thus cheaper.
Still I believe it was wrong from the judge to hand the complainant over the control of all those domains. He's the squatter now.

**myst woman** · 11-02-2009, 11:11 AM

so where is the internet attorneywho will pro bono the appeal?

**Fearless** · 11-02-2009, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by myst woman

so where is the internet attorneywho will pro bono the appeal?

It's hard to appeal a default.

**Gerry** · 11-02-2009, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by Tygerwoody

Thats just dirty.

That is the risk this guy took by not even showing up to court.

That, more than anything, is just plain stupid.

**nicedomains** · 11-02-2009, 11:44 AM

Why domainers are throwing their hands up in disgust over this ruling is beyond me. As pointed out already, this guy is the definition of a cybersquatter...exactly what makes our industry look bad. Zavala registered hundreds of names of NBA players, NBA prospects and many other famous peoples first+last names. He monetized them by putting ads on these domains relevant to basketball and sports. He ignored court dates and ultimately was ordered to pay $120k to Chris Bosh and return ChrisBosh.com. Bosh, not wanting the cash asked for the squatters domain portfolio instead and the judge abliged. What is so hard to understand about that? Was his portfolio worth $120k?? Hell no.

Calling Chris Bosh a cybersquatter now because he holds this portfolio now is ridiculous.. Especially when these were his words after the judgement:

"I am thrilled that I am able to offer the return of these domain names to a host of other athletes and celebrities whose names were cyber-squatted,"

...and when he says 'offer the return of these domains' he isn't talking about selling them either. See the full list.

**Gerry** · 11-02-2009, 11:54 AM

There was a similar court ruling a few years ago in Europe. When this case went to trial (sorry, can't recall the footballer's name), it exposed a common practice of regging teens names who were standout's in their respective sports in hopes that they would make it big.

This deprived those kids/athletes of using their name for their own benefit.

This Chris Bosh case...the registrant is lucky he was not fined and ordered to pay damages ON TOP of what has already been awarded.

Then again, all those on the list of 800 or so could file action one-by-one in civil court seeking damages...

ouch!

**marcorandazza** · 11-02-2009, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by nicedomains

Why domainers are throwing their hands up in disgust over this ruling is beyond me. As pointed out already, this guy is the definition of a cybersquatter...exactly what makes our industry look bad. Zavala registered hundreds of names of NBA players, NBA prospects and many other famous peoples first+last names. He monetized them by putting ads on these domains relevant to basketball and sports. He ignored court dates and ultimately was ordered to pay $120k to Chris Bosh and return ChrisBosh.com. Bosh, not wanting the cash asked for the squatters domain portfolio instead and the judge abliged. What is so hard to understand about that? Was his portfolio worth $120k?? Hell no.

Calling Chris Bosh a cybersquatter now because he holds this portfolio now is ridiculous.. Especially when these were his words after the judgement:

...and when he says 'offer the return of these domains' he isn't talking about selling them either. See the full list.

Agreed. I can't see what the outrage is all about. If you get sued (especially if you actually DID break the law), and you lose (ditto) and then you say "I'm going to ignore the judgment and not pay it," then the plaintiff has every right to seize your property to satisfy the judgment.

Here are the rules.

Rule 1: Don't break the law. If you decide to ignore this rule, then don't be a crybaby when you get sued.

Rule 2: If you get sued, respond to the lawsuit. If you decide to ignore this rule, then don't be a crybaby when there is a default judgment entered against you.

Rule 3: If there is a judgment against you (default or otherwise) then pay it or work out a settlement with the winner. If you decide to ignore this rule, then don't be a crybaby when the court gives the plaintiff your property.

**urlurl** · 11-19-2009, 05:47 PM

what if my name was chris bosh - could i sue him?

**wussadotcom** · 11-20-2009, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by urlurl

what if my name was chris bosh - could i sue him?

are you famous?

**draggar** · 11-20-2009, 07:46 AM

Originally Posted by urlurl

what if my name was chris bosh - could i sue him?

Ask Sam Adams (the mayor of Portland, OR) that same question.
http://www.techdirt.com/blog/satrian...6/180024.shtml

But - you can sue anyone for anything the real question is will you win?

**Giode** · 01-28-2010, 12:22 AM

...

**nicedomains** · 01-28-2010, 01:37 PM

Tell them what you told us, be honest. Say you didn't want to release it for a cybersquatter to get. See if you can arrange a trade to compensate you for the cost of maintaining the domain for several years... Maybe some season tix or a signed stick...