TwoPlusTwo Sues Dutch Boyd For Cyber-Squatting

[companyone]

Hi,


TwoPlusTwo Sues Dutch Boyd Cyber-Squatting

By Jessica Welman for POKER NEWS DAILY | Posted on December 26, 2009

World Series of Poker (WSOP) bracelet winner Russell “Dutch” Boyd may be best known for his career as a professional poker player, but he has also supplemented his income over the years by cyber-speculating, registering a number of poker-related domain names and making money off the traffic that goes to those sites. Boyd’s side job appears to have gotten him in hot water, as the owners and operators of TwoPlusTwo Publishing have filed a suit over his ownership of the domain name TwoPlusTwoPoker.com.

The Las Vegas Sun broke news of the suit earlier this month. The Sun story said TwoPlusTwo Publishing accused Boyd of cyber-squatting on the domain and considered it to be an instance of trademark infringement. Within the article, Boyd commented on the legal action, noting, “It is never fun to be sued, especially by someone you look up to and respect professionally.'' Boyd had choice words for TwoPlusTwo owner Mason Malmouth in particular, whom he accused of bullying. Boyd was not the only alleged cyber-squatter sued by the publishing company. A lawsuit was filed against Anthony Scocozza, who purchased a similar domain name at the beginning of the year. Boyd originally purchased his URL in July of 2004, but has since transferred ownership of the site over to the publishing group.

The article in the Sun proved to just be the beginning of the story though and the drama continued, appropriately enough, on the TwoPlusTwo Poker Forums. Boyd responded to a thread linked to the article and offered his side of the story, stating that he regretted registering the domain name in the first place, but confirmed that the ownership of the domain name was transferred over to Greenberg Traurig, the law firm representing the interests of TwoPlusTwo.

A week later, Malmouth posted a thorough explanation of why the company filed suit, including scans of two cease and desist letters sent to Boyd by Greenberg Traurig on behalf of the company. Malmouth also offered an explanation as to why TwoPlusTwo did not drop the suit since they now have control over the domain name in question: “Due to the length of time the registration was owned by Mr. Boyd, and his blatant infringement, we informed Boyd that the expiration of the TwoPlusTwoPoker.com would not resolve the dispute. At the very least, we needed to know exactly how much revenue the domain name and website had generated and how much traffic the site received.”

Malmouth went on to report that their representation repeatedly tried to settle out of court with Boyd, but the two parties were unable to come anywhere close to an agreement. According to Malmouth, a final e-mail from his attorneys to Boyd letting him know they were left with no choice but to file suit was met with a terse response of “F*** Off.”

Under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), registrants cannot register any domain names that infringe upon the rights of a third party. More specifically, the URL cannot be identical or similar to a pre-existing trademark and the registrant cannot use that domain name in bad faith. Boyd responded in the thread, posting an excerpt of trademark law that suggests because TwoPlusTwo did not meet the notice requirement necessary in order to obtain profits or damages. Moreover, Boyd asserted that the site earned no more than $200 in profits during the five years it was under his ownership.

This is not the first time Boyd’s purchase of domain names has landed him in the spotlight. In October of 2008, Boyd went to arbitration with online poker room PokerHost over his use of the website, PokerHost.net. Boyd registered that URL in 2004 and PokerHost alleged his usage of the site was in violation of UDRP since the company obtained the URL PokerHost.com two years prior. However, because the online site did not launch its gaming services until after Boyd registered the domain name, the judge arbitrating the case ruled in favor of Boyd, saying the term was a generic domain name at time of registration and not a pre-existing trademark. Source

___

Peace!
Dan

[Flexi Web Host]

Was this the guy who ripped a few domainers off a couple of years ago? Just remember a bracelet winner being regular on namepors (and possibly here) a couple of years ago until the proverbial hit the fan and people found they had been ripped off or not paid.

[owntag]

We have NBA player, WSOP winner, who's next? James Cameron?

[PokerPie]

I made a thread on this already, I think in the Legal forum.

Mason Malmuth is getting hosed by his lawyers on this one, but if he somehow wins this will not set a pretty precedent for people who own or register TM domains. Note that Dutch did not even own the domain at the time of the lawsuit, he let it drop and it was owned by TwoPlusTwo. So if you register and then sell or fail to renew a TM domain, the TM holder could come after you at any time in the future, regardless of whether or not you still own it.

I don't think they will win though.

[Domainate.com]

I made a thread on this already, I think in the Legal forum.

Mason Malmuth is getting hosed by his lawyers on this one, but if he somehow wins this will not set a pretty precedent for people who own or register TM domains. Note that Dutch did not even own the domain at the time of the lawsuit, he let it drop and it was owned by TwoPlusTwo. So if you register and then sell or fail to renew a TM domain, the TM holder could come after you at any time in the future, regardless of whether or not you still own it.

I don't think they will win though.

Sadly I know of a case where someone was successfully sued in a ridiculous case that was by no means an obvious TM infringement (think MySpace winning a case against someone for having a _____Space.com name) all despite dropping the name after they threatened lawsuit and asked for the names. Transferring the name to them is much better than dropping it if you think they'll sue you apparently. I don't know if Dutch dropped the name of his own volition (I doubt it was earning much) or if they threatened him and he dropped it...I think if they threatened him and ordered him to transfer the names and he dropped them instead, somehow that gives them grounds for a lawsuit after. It seems ridiculous but like I said, I know of a case where it successfully happened.

[PokerPie]

Dutch dropped it on his own, I believe a couple of years before they sued him.

[Domainate.com]

Dutch dropped it on his own, I believe a couple of years before they sued him.

Oh wow...in that case, it does sound like they're definitely reaching. It IS pretty bad that a poker pro that obviously knew their site would reg a name like that and it's clear if he had the name, he'd easily lose a UDRP so it's hard to say what will happen. I wouldn't necessarily say good luck to him - he pretty well dug his own grave with getting a name like that with his notoriety.

[PokerPie]

I think they are reaching. I should revise what I said, he dropped it on his own, i believe a couple of years before they ever contacted him in any way about. Though from that point until when they sued him was pretty close together - Mason Malmuth made a fairly awesome post on 2+2 about that. Goes something like:

We contacted him about a settlement
Dutch said you guys are nuts
We contacted him about settlement
Dutch replied again telling them they are nuts
They contacted him about settlment
He sent a two word reply 'F*** Off'
'The next day we filed our lawsuit'

Note to self: If I don't intend on paying the person off, ignore their emails until they actually sue me (hint, most people will just give up before they do).

[companyone]

Hey...

Sorry...." PokerPie"

I try not to make duplicate post.... hard to keep track of everybody and every thread...

No bad will intended.

Peace!
Dan