Legal Issues

by Mike Masnick

Filed Under:
domain names, online poker, patents


Popular Online Poker Site Changing Names Due To Patent Dispute

from the what's-a-domain-got-to-do-with-it? dept

Shawn Patrick Green writes "As if online poker weren't embattled enough. Popular online poker site, Bodog, was forced to change its name to after they failed to show up at a patent-dispute trial in Nevada, prompting the judge to suspend its domain, The site has now "permanently" changed its name to and the founder, Calvin Ayre, says that he refuses to pay the guy that brought up the overly-broad patent dispute, who is claiming $48 million in damages." If you're interested, the patent in question can be viewed here. It hardly seems unique or innovative. If you asked someone how they'd design a system for prioritizing the display of certain content over a network, plenty of engineers would have come up with the same sort of solution. The bigger question, though, is why a judge would take away a website's domain name in a patent dispute?

Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1. identicon
    Joe Smith, Sep 20th, 2007 @ 1:22pm


    The patent is so broad that you have to ask why the guy picked Bodog to sue - probably because he knew that Bodog could not come to the US to defend the claim.

    However, since the activities of Bodog are illegal in the United States it is difficult to conceive how the patent holder could have suffered any recoverable damages as a result of any infringement by Bodog.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    Luke Smith, Sep 20th, 2007 @ 1:43pm

    a little lost

    Can the judge enforce US patent protection on a service which can't be sold or marketed in the US, and does Bodog have any revenue generating activities in the US?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Enrico Suarve, Sep 21st, 2007 @ 12:31am

    Re: a little lost

    That isn't required these days

    Haven't you heard? The US is now the worlds lawyer as well as policeman. This sits perfectly with the same logic that allowed e360insight to lie to court in order to prove jurisdiction and then proceed to sue Spamhaus

    American courts no longer need jurisdiction apparently - they arrogantly expect the rest of the world to travel to the US every time one of their citizens goes on a fishing trip

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    anne, Sep 21st, 2007 @ 4:29am


    No Show = Default

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5. icon
    Killer_Tofu (profile), Sep 21st, 2007 @ 5:51am

    Two Things

    That judge = mentally challenged

    That patent = the suck of stupidness

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.