RIGHTBACKACHA
Bodog's Domain Names Confiscated
- Thread starter lnspin
- Start date
- Joined
- May 29, 2004
- Location
- England
SEO discussion (derail) split out and moved to: https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/bodog-seo-discussion-split.19953/
Calvin's 9-12-2007 Blog..................you be the judge!!!
Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)
My Take on the Patent Suit, Patent Trolls and that Stupid Banjo Song
posted on 12 Sep 2007 by Calvin Ayre.
Billy Redden as "Lonny" from the movie "Deliverance" (Photo courtesy Warner Bros.)
CLICK TO PLAY "Dueling Banjos"
It ain't over till it's over.
There seems to be a certain amount of confusion surrounding the patent suit filed by Scott Lewis/1st Technology. As a result I've been asked a number of questions from concerned staff and customers, as well as industry folk, business colleagues and the media—tons of people want to know just what the hell is going on. Questions like: "Who is involved?" "How did this all come about?" "Why have you signed a licensing agreement with Morris Mohawk Gaming Group and what, if anything, does that have to do with the patent suit?" But my favorite question has to be: "Aren't you worried about being sued for making potentially libelous remarks?"
Just so you know, this is still an ongoing matter and I don't have the answers to all of your questions. But I will tell you this much…it is extremely important to see the obvious humor in this patent suit. That's why I've used my blog to express my opinions on the matter. Because all of this is pretty fucking insane and I'm still shaking my head over it.
Still…you've asked. Here are my answers…
My initial reaction to the patent suit?
I wish they would have actually served that company instead of just pretending they did to a Nevada Judge, which is what the research seems to indicate they did.
Have I ever heard of 1st Technology before this suit?
I never heard of them until the domains were grabbed. I think grabbing the domains was a big mistake. If anything, they should have just taken control of them and then quietly negotiated a settlement.
The second they unilaterally redirected them in what I am sure was a big testosterone gratifying move on their part, they gave our side the opportunity to show the world some Bodog power. There is nothing Bodog likes more than a ready-made media circus.
Bodog put up another site in a matter of hours and in less than two weeks the new site was ranking number one in Google searches for Bodog once again. Consequently, the media circus has begun. These guys are “Patent Trolls” and anyone that is curious to know more about them can look up the term on Wikipedia.
How did the licensing agreement with Morris Mohawk Gaming Group come about?
We did the licensing agreement with Morris Mohawk Gaming Group because this type of brand licensing is the way our business model is designed to evolve. We have been working on this for months. It is just a coincidence that this deal was done shortly before the Patent Trolls at 1st Tech pinched the domains.
How is this dispute between 1st Technology and Morris Mohawk?
This is based on a solely US patent dispute and Bodog international does not operate in the US for gaming anymore, the new Morris Mohawk Gaming Group does.
Why blog about the dispute?
Bodog is in the entertainment business and this is a very entertaining story so we are going to have some fun with it. We have a lot more plans to run marketing programs around this dispute if it's not settled.
Why risk running a Scott Lewis dance contest?
It is just a fun way to get the entire company to show the Patent Trolls at 1st Tech how little respect we have for them. We've got all the dance videos and will be releasing them (along with the winning video!) over the next few weeks.
Have I said anything libelous and am I concerned?
This guy tried to ruin my life and the lives of thousands of others around the globe with this move. In my eyes he and his lawyer partners are sub-human. Patent Trolls are parasites on society and progress as a whole. They are modern day pirates preying on successful companies. Patent Trolls invent nothing, manufacture nothing and contribute nothing other than the messes their actions result in. I don't believe the obvious comedy on my blog is libelous, but to be honest I don't really care if it is. If they have a problem with it they can say sorry to everyone and go away or they can come see me and do something about it. In the meantime, I am going to continue to have my fun at their expense and promote Bodog while I’m at it. We're researching 1st Tech and its principals, including the lawyers involved and I will be posting details on all the background info we uncover…so stay tuned to my blog…the "Official Scott Lewis Patent Troll Website"!
Am I concerned about having to testify in the U.S.?
I am not a shareholder, officer or director of the company they are in court with…it is not active in our group and it was just an oversight that someone moved the domains into it. There is no possible way I can be dragged into that case. That is nothing more than another fantasy coming out of their camp. We are having fun with this and look forward to seeing how this unfolds. I think eventually they may actually want to pay us to go away.
What's the deal with that stupid "Dueling Banjos" song?
It's from the movie "Deliverance". In the movie "Lonny" (played by actor Billy Redden) is this mentally challenged inbred…but damn can he play a mean banjo. It's a catchy tune that has come to symbolize the fucking bizarre nature of this whole patent suit thing. You can watch the video here. (**There's also some dueling banjos dance scenes in this clip…it's the sort of stuff we are aspiring to achieve in the Scott Lewis-Patent Troll dance contest!)
And yes I realize I've used the word "fucking" twice in this blog post. Sue me.
Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)
My Take on the Patent Suit, Patent Trolls and that Stupid Banjo Song
posted on 12 Sep 2007 by Calvin Ayre.
Billy Redden as "Lonny" from the movie "Deliverance" (Photo courtesy Warner Bros.)
CLICK TO PLAY "Dueling Banjos"
It ain't over till it's over.
There seems to be a certain amount of confusion surrounding the patent suit filed by Scott Lewis/1st Technology. As a result I've been asked a number of questions from concerned staff and customers, as well as industry folk, business colleagues and the media—tons of people want to know just what the hell is going on. Questions like: "Who is involved?" "How did this all come about?" "Why have you signed a licensing agreement with Morris Mohawk Gaming Group and what, if anything, does that have to do with the patent suit?" But my favorite question has to be: "Aren't you worried about being sued for making potentially libelous remarks?"
Just so you know, this is still an ongoing matter and I don't have the answers to all of your questions. But I will tell you this much…it is extremely important to see the obvious humor in this patent suit. That's why I've used my blog to express my opinions on the matter. Because all of this is pretty fucking insane and I'm still shaking my head over it.
Still…you've asked. Here are my answers…
My initial reaction to the patent suit?
I wish they would have actually served that company instead of just pretending they did to a Nevada Judge, which is what the research seems to indicate they did.
Have I ever heard of 1st Technology before this suit?
I never heard of them until the domains were grabbed. I think grabbing the domains was a big mistake. If anything, they should have just taken control of them and then quietly negotiated a settlement.
The second they unilaterally redirected them in what I am sure was a big testosterone gratifying move on their part, they gave our side the opportunity to show the world some Bodog power. There is nothing Bodog likes more than a ready-made media circus.
Bodog put up another site in a matter of hours and in less than two weeks the new site was ranking number one in Google searches for Bodog once again. Consequently, the media circus has begun. These guys are “Patent Trolls” and anyone that is curious to know more about them can look up the term on Wikipedia.
How did the licensing agreement with Morris Mohawk Gaming Group come about?
We did the licensing agreement with Morris Mohawk Gaming Group because this type of brand licensing is the way our business model is designed to evolve. We have been working on this for months. It is just a coincidence that this deal was done shortly before the Patent Trolls at 1st Tech pinched the domains.
How is this dispute between 1st Technology and Morris Mohawk?
This is based on a solely US patent dispute and Bodog international does not operate in the US for gaming anymore, the new Morris Mohawk Gaming Group does.
Why blog about the dispute?
Bodog is in the entertainment business and this is a very entertaining story so we are going to have some fun with it. We have a lot more plans to run marketing programs around this dispute if it's not settled.
Why risk running a Scott Lewis dance contest?
It is just a fun way to get the entire company to show the Patent Trolls at 1st Tech how little respect we have for them. We've got all the dance videos and will be releasing them (along with the winning video!) over the next few weeks.
Have I said anything libelous and am I concerned?
This guy tried to ruin my life and the lives of thousands of others around the globe with this move. In my eyes he and his lawyer partners are sub-human. Patent Trolls are parasites on society and progress as a whole. They are modern day pirates preying on successful companies. Patent Trolls invent nothing, manufacture nothing and contribute nothing other than the messes their actions result in. I don't believe the obvious comedy on my blog is libelous, but to be honest I don't really care if it is. If they have a problem with it they can say sorry to everyone and go away or they can come see me and do something about it. In the meantime, I am going to continue to have my fun at their expense and promote Bodog while I’m at it. We're researching 1st Tech and its principals, including the lawyers involved and I will be posting details on all the background info we uncover…so stay tuned to my blog…the "Official Scott Lewis Patent Troll Website"!
Am I concerned about having to testify in the U.S.?
I am not a shareholder, officer or director of the company they are in court with…it is not active in our group and it was just an oversight that someone moved the domains into it. There is no possible way I can be dragged into that case. That is nothing more than another fantasy coming out of their camp. We are having fun with this and look forward to seeing how this unfolds. I think eventually they may actually want to pay us to go away.
What's the deal with that stupid "Dueling Banjos" song?
It's from the movie "Deliverance". In the movie "Lonny" (played by actor Billy Redden) is this mentally challenged inbred…but damn can he play a mean banjo. It's a catchy tune that has come to symbolize the fucking bizarre nature of this whole patent suit thing. You can watch the video here. (**There's also some dueling banjos dance scenes in this clip…it's the sort of stuff we are aspiring to achieve in the Scott Lewis-Patent Troll dance contest!)
And yes I realize I've used the word "fucking" twice in this blog post. Sue me.
- Joined
- May 11, 2006
- Location
- North of Antarctica
Sure, Calvin.Ayrehead said:
On an unrelated note, I'm looking to buy a bridge - would you by coincidence happen to have one for sale?
He certainly seems to be putting a brave face on it, but we're seeing one side of a story here and by the looks of it 1st Technologies are holding their fire until they get into court, when the 'humourous' aspect of this could be a case of "he who laughs last laughs loudest."
Given the list of online gambling companies that have licensed the 1st Technologies patent, I'm surprised that noone at Bodog seems to have heard of the company or Scott Lewis.
But quite apart from the personal chutzpah and chest-thumping, this is another interesting development because again it shows the direction Bodog is taking to fight the 1st Technologies case.
They certainly have a lot riding on Alwyn Morris and his company, which makes his response to Nash's questions even more pertinent - I presume nothing further has been heard from him?
Given the list of online gambling companies that have licensed the 1st Technologies patent, I'm surprised that noone at Bodog seems to have heard of the company or Scott Lewis.
But quite apart from the personal chutzpah and chest-thumping, this is another interesting development because again it shows the direction Bodog is taking to fight the 1st Technologies case.
They certainly have a lot riding on Alwyn Morris and his company, which makes his response to Nash's questions even more pertinent - I presume nothing further has been heard from him?
I have checked around but have seen nothing from Morris and would assume Morris may listen to his legal counsel (and remain silent) and not make some of the mistakes Calvin appears to be making based on the recent narcissism in his blogs. I can only imagine what Calvin's legal counsel is thinking.
All I see here is someone who has absolutely no respect for intellectual or industrial property rights.
Did ya mess up CA? Did ya think you didn't have to play by the rules like everybody else? Can you admit you are wrong and settle up?
I see him calling Lewis a patent troll, but CA never denies THAT HE STOLE SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY (err used it without permission, yeah)
What a joke.
Did ya mess up CA? Did ya think you didn't have to play by the rules like everybody else? Can you admit you are wrong and settle up?
I see him calling Lewis a patent troll, but CA never denies THAT HE STOLE SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY (err used it without permission, yeah)
What a joke.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2004
- Location
- Up$hitCreek
I realize I'm probably repeating myself, but this is bugging me. 
What I still want to know is... why isn't RTG being hit with this? (I am assuming here that RTG has not paid and signed an agreement w/1st Technologies. Please someone correct me if there is information to the contrary.)
I've seen that Playtech software ponied up for 1st Techonolgy rights -- but not individual Playtech casinos.
So... while I have no particular fondness for Ayre, I still don't quite see how the judgement can be brought against a single RTG casino for not having a paid license to use whatever that super duper thingy is that 1st Technologies holds the patent on.
And while I'm asking silly questions... did we ever find out who actually owns RTG now??
What I still want to know is... why isn't RTG being hit with this? (I am assuming here that RTG has not paid and signed an agreement w/1st Technologies. Please someone correct me if there is information to the contrary.)
I've seen that Playtech software ponied up for 1st Techonolgy rights -- but not individual Playtech casinos.
So... while I have no particular fondness for Ayre, I still don't quite see how the judgement can be brought against a single RTG casino for not having a paid license to use whatever that super duper thingy is that 1st Technologies holds the patent on.
And while I'm asking silly questions... did we ever find out who actually owns RTG now??
Perhaps 1st Technologies have found out how hard it is to even communicate with RTG these days, let alone serve process on them in their new Central American domicile. They're also probably not as profitable a target....and perhaps they have been cleverer than Bodog in regard to US-attachable assets.
Nothing has come to light yet on the new Bodog ownership....nor has it been confirmed that there was even a takeover. Plenty of rumours but no fact, and the possibility of a little subterfuge cannot be ruled out imo - McMain is still the CEO, after all.
And Bodog has it's own unique version of the software.
One more thought seeing as we're speculating - if you wanted to make a high profile statement that might persuade more companies to take you seriously and license, what better target than Bodog....for all the above reasons...and the likely reaction from Calvin?.
Nothing has come to light yet on the new Bodog ownership....nor has it been confirmed that there was even a takeover. Plenty of rumours but no fact, and the possibility of a little subterfuge cannot be ruled out imo - McMain is still the CEO, after all.
And Bodog has it's own unique version of the software.
One more thought seeing as we're speculating - if you wanted to make a high profile statement that might persuade more companies to take you seriously and license, what better target than Bodog....for all the above reasons...and the likely reaction from Calvin?.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 1998
- Location
- Bierland
I can attest to that. RTG has pretty much made themselves "untouchable"
You mean RTG. At first, I thought I missed something in this thread.
Yep, makes sense.
Admin note. I'm removing the references to child sex and drug dealing from the banned user's comments. CHAINSAWDAVE tried signing up again in this forum under the disguise of Coolhandluke, but Vortran007 - my forum bouncer - booted him out before he could start spewing his spewage.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2004
- Location
- Up$hitCreek
And that may be the straw that at least puts a crimp in the camel's back.
I can attest to that. RTG has pretty much made themselves "untouchable"
You mean RTG. At first, I thought I missed something in this thread.
Yep, makes sense.
QUOTE]
Oops! Yeah, you're right - I meant RTG ownership - fingers typing one way - brain going the other LOL!!
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2006
- Location
- South Orange County
Well we seem to be looking for faults in Calvin today, but Bodog always treated me right; just the opposite of the clip shot joints down there. I don't blame him for the slow pays to the U.S., everybody knows what's going on. In time, I think this will be fixed.
His software ... the 1Tech software ... I haven't heard diddly on the details here. Compression software?! There's a lot of this kind of software and none of its unique. Maybe Spearmaster could shed some light on this.....
Is this a hate Calvin fest; why? We haven't heard all the facts yet. If he creates a decent Casino that's decent to its players then I'd give him the benefit of the doubt for now.
On a side-note: I do love that place on the Island of the Dominican Rep he has down there. (in his blog) ... aah ... I'd like to try one of those Dominican Cigars he's got too!!
His software ... the 1Tech software ... I haven't heard diddly on the details here. Compression software?! There's a lot of this kind of software and none of its unique. Maybe Spearmaster could shed some light on this.....
Is this a hate Calvin fest; why? We haven't heard all the facts yet. If he creates a decent Casino that's decent to its players then I'd give him the benefit of the doubt for now.
On a side-note: I do love that place on the Island of the Dominican Rep he has down there. (in his blog) ... aah ... I'd like to try one of those Dominican Cigars he's got too!!
No hate fest here. I am just delusional and hallucinating........I will get a doctor's appt. on Monday.
Further Bodog domain change
Looks like another Bodog domain change - this release just out:
September 18, 2007
St. Johns, Antigua
High stakes, hot women and killer parties in exotic locales - Bodog has always known how to roll. It's all part of the company's play hard philosophy and now it's all part of the Bodog life, as the digital entertainment giant is pleased to announce the launch of www.bodoglife.com
Recently, there have been changes at Bodog concerning the company's domain name. Bodog temporarily used newbodog.com after their root domain was hijacked in a frivolous patent dispute. In an effort to move to a more accurately-named home, the company is pleased to announce bodoglife.com.
"Hey, the world changes, and if you don't change with it, you get left behind. We've been leading the good times for a long time, and nobody will leave us behind," said Calvin Ayre, Bodog's founder. "That said, although the Bodog address is changing the bottom line is: at Bodog, it's business as usual. Same great site, just a new Web address."
Though the domain dispute caused some drama throughout the company, a talented staff of over 1000 people rallied together and maintained the billion dollar business on a strong growth curve during one of the busiest seasons.
In addition to debuting the new domains, the company launched a Football Fantasy site, announced the winner of their Bodog Battle of the Bands contest on fuse TV, launched multilingual customer service, had a Bodog qualifier at the final table of the World Series of Poker Europe and put a new season of Bodog Fight into post-production. Phew.
Bodog is still the most trusted place on the planet to get your kicks, whether they be poker, music, mixed martial arts, casino or sports betting.
This is Bodog. This is the life.
www.bodoglife.com. Play hard.
Looks like another Bodog domain change - this release just out:
September 18, 2007
St. Johns, Antigua
High stakes, hot women and killer parties in exotic locales - Bodog has always known how to roll. It's all part of the company's play hard philosophy and now it's all part of the Bodog life, as the digital entertainment giant is pleased to announce the launch of www.bodoglife.com
Recently, there have been changes at Bodog concerning the company's domain name. Bodog temporarily used newbodog.com after their root domain was hijacked in a frivolous patent dispute. In an effort to move to a more accurately-named home, the company is pleased to announce bodoglife.com.
"Hey, the world changes, and if you don't change with it, you get left behind. We've been leading the good times for a long time, and nobody will leave us behind," said Calvin Ayre, Bodog's founder. "That said, although the Bodog address is changing the bottom line is: at Bodog, it's business as usual. Same great site, just a new Web address."
Though the domain dispute caused some drama throughout the company, a talented staff of over 1000 people rallied together and maintained the billion dollar business on a strong growth curve during one of the busiest seasons.
In addition to debuting the new domains, the company launched a Football Fantasy site, announced the winner of their Bodog Battle of the Bands contest on fuse TV, launched multilingual customer service, had a Bodog qualifier at the final table of the World Series of Poker Europe and put a new season of Bodog Fight into post-production. Phew.
Bodog is still the most trusted place on the planet to get your kicks, whether they be poker, music, mixed martial arts, casino or sports betting.
This is Bodog. This is the life.
www.bodoglife.com. Play hard.
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2006
- Location
- Italy
So this new domain seems to be THE new bodog site. I think the legal battle it's lost then.
MORE FROM THE WORLD ACCORDING TO CALVIN
posted on 24 Sep 2007 by Calvin Ayre.
Click to play "Dueling Banjos"
The Patent Trolls over at 1st Tech have put together a case that has more holes than a golf course and smells worse than 100 pounds of raw meat left to rot in a back alley dumpster during a 2-month-old garbage strike.
On October 11th, 2007 Bodog and 1st Technology LLC will meet in Nevada court to argue the default judgment handed down to the gaming company by judge for the Superior Court of Kings County in Seattle, Washington. 1st Technology is saying the $48 million judgment is fair and good because Bodog was infringing upon its patent (United States Patent No. 5,564,001 entitled “Method and System for Interactively Transmitting Multimedia Information Over a Network which Requires a Reduced Bandwidth”) while operating out of the United States.
Prior to issuing those claims, 1st Tech should have done a more thorough job with their research. Here are the facts:
Bodog Entertainment SA the CR company is an international company and it does not have a presence in the United States and is not part of the Bodog Group of Companies and has no assets. Domains are not assets and the domains it held were on behalf of other companies.
United States patent disputes are not possible against an international company that does not operate within the United States, particularly one that does not have any operations that could even use a patented process.
Nobody involved with the company that was sued or anyone with BodogLife has any knowledge of anyone getting served and this is the basis of the appeal of the judgment on Oct 11th. You cannot have a valid default judgment without having valid service as far as we know.
We believe this ridiculous decision will be overturned and all the domains will be freed. However they will not be returned to their previous roll of prominence in Bodog's operating entities as this roll will be taken by the new BodogLife.com structure from here forward. My guess is that no matter what the outcome of this legal process, Raymond Niro and the 1st Tech Patent Trolls will never see anything but ridicule coming from Bodog as we have been clear since first finding out what these guys were doing when they grabbed the domains….the company they are in court with is not part of the Bodog group anymore, has zero operations and zero assets…and the BodogLife Gaming Group of Companies does not operate in the United States. They will spend a lot of money and we will generate a lot of press but they will figure this out eventually. Oh ya…did I mention they never served us?
This entry was posted on Monday, September 24th, 2007 at 6:57 pm
You do not have permission to view link
Log in or register now.
posted on 24 Sep 2007 by Calvin Ayre.
Click to play "Dueling Banjos"
The Patent Trolls over at 1st Tech have put together a case that has more holes than a golf course and smells worse than 100 pounds of raw meat left to rot in a back alley dumpster during a 2-month-old garbage strike.
On October 11th, 2007 Bodog and 1st Technology LLC will meet in Nevada court to argue the default judgment handed down to the gaming company by judge for the Superior Court of Kings County in Seattle, Washington. 1st Technology is saying the $48 million judgment is fair and good because Bodog was infringing upon its patent (United States Patent No. 5,564,001 entitled “Method and System for Interactively Transmitting Multimedia Information Over a Network which Requires a Reduced Bandwidth”) while operating out of the United States.
Prior to issuing those claims, 1st Tech should have done a more thorough job with their research. Here are the facts:
Bodog Entertainment SA the CR company is an international company and it does not have a presence in the United States and is not part of the Bodog Group of Companies and has no assets. Domains are not assets and the domains it held were on behalf of other companies.
United States patent disputes are not possible against an international company that does not operate within the United States, particularly one that does not have any operations that could even use a patented process.
Nobody involved with the company that was sued or anyone with BodogLife has any knowledge of anyone getting served and this is the basis of the appeal of the judgment on Oct 11th. You cannot have a valid default judgment without having valid service as far as we know.
We believe this ridiculous decision will be overturned and all the domains will be freed. However they will not be returned to their previous roll of prominence in Bodog's operating entities as this roll will be taken by the new BodogLife.com structure from here forward. My guess is that no matter what the outcome of this legal process, Raymond Niro and the 1st Tech Patent Trolls will never see anything but ridicule coming from Bodog as we have been clear since first finding out what these guys were doing when they grabbed the domains….the company they are in court with is not part of the Bodog group anymore, has zero operations and zero assets…and the BodogLife Gaming Group of Companies does not operate in the United States. They will spend a lot of money and we will generate a lot of press but they will figure this out eventually. Oh ya…did I mention they never served us?
This entry was posted on Monday, September 24th, 2007 at 6:57 pm
Googling Raymond Niro delivers quite a lot of information, including this:
Link Removed (Old/Invalid)
By the looks of that blog entry Bodog's central defence remains pretty much the same - that they weren't served properly.
"Nobody involved with the company that was sued or anyone with BodogLife has any knowledge of anyone getting served and this is the basis of the appeal of the judgment on Oct 11th. You cannot have a valid default judgment without having valid service as far as we know."
Presumably Mohawk Morris will be the people appearing in court on the Bodog side in Nevada next month - that is going to be one very interesting hearing.
Link Removed (Old/Invalid)
By the looks of that blog entry Bodog's central defence remains pretty much the same - that they weren't served properly.
"Nobody involved with the company that was sued or anyone with BodogLife has any knowledge of anyone getting served and this is the basis of the appeal of the judgment on Oct 11th. You cannot have a valid default judgment without having valid service as far as we know."
Presumably Mohawk Morris will be the people appearing in court on the Bodog side in Nevada next month - that is going to be one very interesting hearing.
Can't even take a 20 minute break before you beat moi to it
...............Now I planned on checking TheColdEye but I bet (npi) you get there first
Last edited:
Absolutely agree on all counts above JS. Random#rs makes some excellent points in regards to Paddy in the last paragraph of Post#134.
BODOG TO APPEAL NEVADA PATENT RULING IN OCTOBER
But 1st Technologies have hired some big legal guns
There could be fireworks in Nevada on October 11 when Bodog, presumably in the form of its Morris Mohawk brand licensee, faces off against 1st Technologies in the first face-to-face clash of the patent dispute that has thus far cost Bodog its brands (see previous InfoPowa reports)
According to Bodog boss Calvin Ayre's blog, the two sides will argue the validity of the default judgment handed down to the gaming company by Nevada judiciary and a judge in the Superior Court of King's County in Seattle, Washington.
1st Technology claims the $48 million default judgment is fair and good because Bodog (which was not present to contest the claim) infringed its United States Patent No. 5,564,001 entitled "Method and System for Interactively Transmitting Multimedia Information Over a Network which Requires a Reduced Bandwidth" while operating in the United States.
Giving a hint at the defence strategy, Ayre writes that Bodog Entertainment SA as a Costa Rican company is an international entity that has neither a presence or assets in the United States. He adds that it is not part of the Bodog Group of Companies and has no assets, because domains are not assets and the domains it held were on behalf of other unspecified companies.
Domain names are a part of the world community based on ICANN's charter and mission statement, which brings into question whether or not they could or should be seized.
Bodog's main defence, though seems to rest on its contention that it was not properly served on the Nevada patent action, thus destroying the allegation that it was in default at the hearing.
Ayre writes: "Nobody involved with the company that was sued or anyone with BodogLife [a new brand recently launched as a consequence of the patent dispute] has any knowledge of anyone getting served and this is the basis of the appeal of the judgment on Oct 11th. You cannot have a valid default judgment without having valid service as far as we know."
Describing the court's decision as "ridiculous" Ayre goes on to opine that it will be overturned and the domains reinstated as Bodog's. However, the new BodogLife brand will continue to be the group's prominent brand going forward.
Patents issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office grew to 165 485 last year from 96 727 in 1990. Patent-infringement lawsuits, meanwhile, doubled to 2 400 from 1988 to 2001, according to the National Academy of Sciences.
Bodog's lawyers will face a formidable adversary in court, it appears. 1st Technologies is represented by one of the most successful patent action law firms in the United States - the 26-lawyer Chicago firm of Niro, Scavone, Haller &. Niro, devoted exclusively to plaintiffs intellectual actions, often on a contingency basis where the company gets 45 percent of proceeds from a license, jury verdict or settlement.
The head of the firm, Raymond Niro has won dozens of patent-related jury verdicts worth more than $400 million, according to Law.com. Among his truimphs Niro won one of Colorado's biggest patent-infringement cases in 1997 when a Denver jury awarded inventor Ron Chasteen $57 million from snowmobile maker Polaris Industries and its engine supplier, Fuji Heavy Industries. An appeals court boosted the award to roughly $95 million.
Other major cases include the Research in Motion action, where the Canadian maker of BlackBerry hand-held e-mail devices, settled with NTP Inc. of Virginia on March 3 this year for $612.5 million. RIM refused to pay royalties to NTP for its wireless e-mail technology but lost at trial and faced a potential shutdown.
Another was the miniscule patent holder Freedom Wireless, which won a $148.1 million award from Boston Communications Group and four other companies last year in an infringement case over a patent for prepaid cellphone systems, whilst in a dispute between Denver-based Qwest with Texas company PhoneTel, more than a dozen technology and telecommunications companies settled on caller-ID technology developed by deceased Japanese inventor Kazuo Hashimoto. All settlements exceeded $65 million.
Law.com succinctly observes: "Raymond Niro sues first, settles fast, and collects millions..."
But 1st Technologies have hired some big legal guns
There could be fireworks in Nevada on October 11 when Bodog, presumably in the form of its Morris Mohawk brand licensee, faces off against 1st Technologies in the first face-to-face clash of the patent dispute that has thus far cost Bodog its brands (see previous InfoPowa reports)
According to Bodog boss Calvin Ayre's blog, the two sides will argue the validity of the default judgment handed down to the gaming company by Nevada judiciary and a judge in the Superior Court of King's County in Seattle, Washington.
1st Technology claims the $48 million default judgment is fair and good because Bodog (which was not present to contest the claim) infringed its United States Patent No. 5,564,001 entitled "Method and System for Interactively Transmitting Multimedia Information Over a Network which Requires a Reduced Bandwidth" while operating in the United States.
Giving a hint at the defence strategy, Ayre writes that Bodog Entertainment SA as a Costa Rican company is an international entity that has neither a presence or assets in the United States. He adds that it is not part of the Bodog Group of Companies and has no assets, because domains are not assets and the domains it held were on behalf of other unspecified companies.
Domain names are a part of the world community based on ICANN's charter and mission statement, which brings into question whether or not they could or should be seized.
Bodog's main defence, though seems to rest on its contention that it was not properly served on the Nevada patent action, thus destroying the allegation that it was in default at the hearing.
Ayre writes: "Nobody involved with the company that was sued or anyone with BodogLife [a new brand recently launched as a consequence of the patent dispute] has any knowledge of anyone getting served and this is the basis of the appeal of the judgment on Oct 11th. You cannot have a valid default judgment without having valid service as far as we know."
Describing the court's decision as "ridiculous" Ayre goes on to opine that it will be overturned and the domains reinstated as Bodog's. However, the new BodogLife brand will continue to be the group's prominent brand going forward.
Patents issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office grew to 165 485 last year from 96 727 in 1990. Patent-infringement lawsuits, meanwhile, doubled to 2 400 from 1988 to 2001, according to the National Academy of Sciences.
Bodog's lawyers will face a formidable adversary in court, it appears. 1st Technologies is represented by one of the most successful patent action law firms in the United States - the 26-lawyer Chicago firm of Niro, Scavone, Haller &. Niro, devoted exclusively to plaintiffs intellectual actions, often on a contingency basis where the company gets 45 percent of proceeds from a license, jury verdict or settlement.
The head of the firm, Raymond Niro has won dozens of patent-related jury verdicts worth more than $400 million, according to Law.com. Among his truimphs Niro won one of Colorado's biggest patent-infringement cases in 1997 when a Denver jury awarded inventor Ron Chasteen $57 million from snowmobile maker Polaris Industries and its engine supplier, Fuji Heavy Industries. An appeals court boosted the award to roughly $95 million.
Other major cases include the Research in Motion action, where the Canadian maker of BlackBerry hand-held e-mail devices, settled with NTP Inc. of Virginia on March 3 this year for $612.5 million. RIM refused to pay royalties to NTP for its wireless e-mail technology but lost at trial and faced a potential shutdown.
Another was the miniscule patent holder Freedom Wireless, which won a $148.1 million award from Boston Communications Group and four other companies last year in an infringement case over a patent for prepaid cellphone systems, whilst in a dispute between Denver-based Qwest with Texas company PhoneTel, more than a dozen technology and telecommunications companies settled on caller-ID technology developed by deceased Japanese inventor Kazuo Hashimoto. All settlements exceeded $65 million.
Law.com succinctly observes: "Raymond Niro sues first, settles fast, and collects millions..."
MORE FROM THE WORLD ACCORDING TO THE COLD EYE
Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)
There is nothing but silence from Alwyn Morris, one of Canada's most respected native leaders, over a claim by BC con man Calvin Ayre that he has entered into a criminal conspiracy with Morris' company, Morris Mohawk Gaming.
In probably the first time a criminal conspiracy has been announced in a press release, Ayre said that Morris Mohawk had entered into a licensing agreement that would see it operate all of Bodog's gaming operations in North America, which is essentially the US so far as Bodog operations go. All of Bodog's operations in the US are against the criminal law of that country and a number of similar operations and individuals have been, or are being, prosecuted there and jail terms have resulted.
Section 465 (3) of Canada's Criminal Code says,
(3) Every one who, while in Canada, conspires with any one to do anything referred to in subsection (1) in a place outside Canada that is an offence under the laws of that place shall be deemed to have conspired to do that thing in Canada.
This section of the criminal law would appear to be capable of bringing not only Alwyn Morris, but Calvin Ayre, before the Canadian courts on charges of conspiring in Canada to violate the United States Code. However, it must be remembered that the only link that Morris has to this crime is a claim by Ayre in a press release, and a quote supposedly from Morris that would indicate he actually is in the agreement. Until some concrete affirmation of his involvement is made by Morris himself through credible sources, no one should consider the Order of Canada holder as part of this conspiracy. However, concrete affirmation could take the form of Morris appearing as a party in any US court action seeking to reverse the recent judgments against Bodog in Nevada and Washington courts.
The Mohawk Gambit, as it is now called, appears to be the best Ayre can do as a strategy in dealing with the devastating legal actions brought on by 1st Technology LLC, a Nevada company that holds a patent on processes within the Bodog gaming software and on which Bodog has refused to acquire a license and pay royalties. As part of the legal actions, 1st Technology has gained control of Bodog's domain names, resulting in a very serious loss of search engine ranking for Bodog with typical gaming search queries. The transparent strategy appears to be to claim that an agreement existed between Bodog and Morris to operate the licenses, which would include the lost domains, that predated the court's judgment and hence Morris had a right to operate the domains that should not be lost by the claims against Bodog.
It's typical Calvin Ayre, nothing really different than the criminal approach he has been taking to business since his Bicer Medical days. Undoubtably, no agreement ever existed with Morris prior to the 1st Tech actions. Any claim to the contrary would have to involve perjury if brought to the US courts, as well as charges of conspiracy to obstruct justice.
Ayre may soon be seeing the inside of a Canadian courtroom at any rate. Some years ago, he perjured himself in an affidavit filed in BC Supreme Court in support of his sister Anita Ayre aka Anita Eden in a child custody dispute. In what was the most preposterous of a string of lies advanced by Ayre/Eden, Calvin Ayre swore under oath that he had nothing to do with a 1987 marijuana smuggling scheme that resulted in a four year sentence for his father, Kenneth Ayre. A private information charging perjury against Calvin Ayre, and conspiracy to obstruct justice against both Calvin Ayre and Anita Ayre/Eden will be filed in October in provincial court in Vancouver.
Don't be surprised if his defense has something to do with Mohawks.
Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)
There is nothing but silence from Alwyn Morris, one of Canada's most respected native leaders, over a claim by BC con man Calvin Ayre that he has entered into a criminal conspiracy with Morris' company, Morris Mohawk Gaming.
In probably the first time a criminal conspiracy has been announced in a press release, Ayre said that Morris Mohawk had entered into a licensing agreement that would see it operate all of Bodog's gaming operations in North America, which is essentially the US so far as Bodog operations go. All of Bodog's operations in the US are against the criminal law of that country and a number of similar operations and individuals have been, or are being, prosecuted there and jail terms have resulted.
Section 465 (3) of Canada's Criminal Code says,
(3) Every one who, while in Canada, conspires with any one to do anything referred to in subsection (1) in a place outside Canada that is an offence under the laws of that place shall be deemed to have conspired to do that thing in Canada.
This section of the criminal law would appear to be capable of bringing not only Alwyn Morris, but Calvin Ayre, before the Canadian courts on charges of conspiring in Canada to violate the United States Code. However, it must be remembered that the only link that Morris has to this crime is a claim by Ayre in a press release, and a quote supposedly from Morris that would indicate he actually is in the agreement. Until some concrete affirmation of his involvement is made by Morris himself through credible sources, no one should consider the Order of Canada holder as part of this conspiracy. However, concrete affirmation could take the form of Morris appearing as a party in any US court action seeking to reverse the recent judgments against Bodog in Nevada and Washington courts.
The Mohawk Gambit, as it is now called, appears to be the best Ayre can do as a strategy in dealing with the devastating legal actions brought on by 1st Technology LLC, a Nevada company that holds a patent on processes within the Bodog gaming software and on which Bodog has refused to acquire a license and pay royalties. As part of the legal actions, 1st Technology has gained control of Bodog's domain names, resulting in a very serious loss of search engine ranking for Bodog with typical gaming search queries. The transparent strategy appears to be to claim that an agreement existed between Bodog and Morris to operate the licenses, which would include the lost domains, that predated the court's judgment and hence Morris had a right to operate the domains that should not be lost by the claims against Bodog.
It's typical Calvin Ayre, nothing really different than the criminal approach he has been taking to business since his Bicer Medical days. Undoubtably, no agreement ever existed with Morris prior to the 1st Tech actions. Any claim to the contrary would have to involve perjury if brought to the US courts, as well as charges of conspiracy to obstruct justice.
Ayre may soon be seeing the inside of a Canadian courtroom at any rate. Some years ago, he perjured himself in an affidavit filed in BC Supreme Court in support of his sister Anita Ayre aka Anita Eden in a child custody dispute. In what was the most preposterous of a string of lies advanced by Ayre/Eden, Calvin Ayre swore under oath that he had nothing to do with a 1987 marijuana smuggling scheme that resulted in a four year sentence for his father, Kenneth Ayre. A private information charging perjury against Calvin Ayre, and conspiracy to obstruct justice against both Calvin Ayre and Anita Ayre/Eden will be filed in October in provincial court in Vancouver.
Don't be surprised if his defense has something to do with Mohawks.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 1998
- Location
- Bierland
Hi NASHVEGAS,
I'm not sure that I want this stuff here. The coldeye website is run by a guy who has been banned here twice for violating rule 1.6 and 1.11
1.6 - No "Libelous" Posts. Do not make posts that could be considered libelous, defamatory, or posting merely to cause harm to another's business. Opinions are expected, but do not attack others with accusations of criminal activity unless this has been proven in a court of law.
1.11 - Please do not exploit this board to promote your own personal agenda. If the moderators (and members) feel that you are spamming the board with links to your website, etc., your account may be suspended.
When you copy these ramblings and paste them here, you are giving this guy a platform that I really don't care to give. I don't mind you discussing these matters, but simply copying and pasting his posts undermine his banishment.
Thanks for your undersatnding.
I'm not sure that I want this stuff here. The coldeye website is run by a guy who has been banned here twice for violating rule 1.6 and 1.11
1.6 - No "Libelous" Posts. Do not make posts that could be considered libelous, defamatory, or posting merely to cause harm to another's business. Opinions are expected, but do not attack others with accusations of criminal activity unless this has been proven in a court of law.
1.11 - Please do not exploit this board to promote your own personal agenda. If the moderators (and members) feel that you are spamming the board with links to your website, etc., your account may be suspended.
When you copy these ramblings and paste them here, you are giving this guy a platform that I really don't care to give. I don't mind you discussing these matters, but simply copying and pasting his posts undermine his banishment.
Thanks for your undersatnding.
Understood.........Respectfully,NV
Update
DEVALUED DOMAINS AT ONLINE GAMBLING GROUP
Bodog owner claims confiscated domains have lost value
The owner of the Bodog online gambling group fired another broadside at patent litigation opponent First Technologies this week on his blog Calvin Ayre Life.com, taunting 1st Tech's CEO Dr. Scott Lewis on an alleged decline in the Bodog domains he holds by court order.
The two companies are still locked in litigation over 1st Technologies claim that Bodog infringed patents on Internet technology, which led to Nevada and Washington judges awarding a $49 million default judgement against Bodog, and delivered the Bodog domains into the hands of 1st Technologies. Reacting fast, Bodog launched the new brand Bodog Life.com and continued its online gambling and entertainment facilities with minimal interruption.
Since then, Bodog founder Calvin Ayre has used his blog to repeatedly attack Scott Lewis and his company, describing it as a "patent troll." This has clearly irritated Lewis, who has asked Ayre to desist with the name calling. Judging by Ayre's latest posts that is not going to happen.
This week, Ayre claims that unnamed "domain evaluation experts" have advised him that the old Internet domains held by Lewis have declined in value, whilst the new domains have flourished.
"Although the value of Bodog's old domains has taken a huge hit since Patent Troll Scott Lewis and 1st Technologies launched a patent infringement case against [Bodog], the new Bodoglife.com domain is now worth over $1 million," Ayre writes. In contrast, he reveals that the domains held by Lewis have declined, quoting the following valuations:
Bodog.com domain value Jan. 17, 2007: $692,580
Bodog.com domain value as of Nov. 14, 2007: $264,930
"Well well well if this ain't a kick in the pants then I don't know what is," Ayre crows: "After 2.5 months of having all of Bodog's old domains black holed by the Patent Trolls over at 1st Technologies, domain evaluation experts say Bodog's original domains have lost over 75% of their value, while the new Bodoglife domain is now worth over $1 million dollars and climbing."
The Bodog founder goes on to explain that several factors establish a domain's value, such as traffic (number of daily unique visitors), brandability (presence, relationship with customers, cultural relevance, emotional connection, easy to remember), search engine compatibility (listed in all major search engines, search engine friendly content), page rank (number of relevant websites that link to your site), domain extensions (.com), and linguistics (easy to pronounce) for starters.
"But one of the main determining factorsespecially in the case of Bodog.comis domain parking revenue," Ayre claims. "Why? It's simple: Revenue is a measurable factor and comparisons can be made for revenue to sale price of other domains."
"In our case we still maintain US and international trademarks on Bodog for the areas of entertainment (i.e. we are in many international domains such as Bodog.eu)," Ayre explains. "This means Bodog cannot be trademarked by anyone else. So thiscombined with its having lost all of its search ranking, along with Bodoglife.com now being the top-ranked site for Bodog searchmakes Bodog.com nearly valueless to anyone but us. Anyone who bought Bodog.com, as an example, would immediately be in court with us fighting a trademark case and thus making it difficult to sell for any high amount.
"Scott Lewis and the rest of the Patent Trolls over at 1st Tech really did not understand the Internet or branding when they shut those domains offit was a pretty stupid conclusion to a fairly sophisticated legal muggingthey got so greedy at the last moment that their hormones started making decisionsand instead of quietly telling us they could shut them off and allow us to quietly send them a face-saving payment they went ahead and did it and then sent in that now famous extortion email that we ignored," the Bodog chief taunts, although that last sentence perhaps indicates a solution that might have been.
Ayre ends his current attack with a reminder that Bodog is not in this [1st Technologies] lawsuit, reiterating that the company is "...an assetless ex-supplier that shut down its operations in Sept. 2006 and was doing domain management for us that got sued."
Indicating that the legal battle has some time yet to run, he adds: "This is only a domain rights law issue to Bodog; it's not a patent case from our perspective. There is no winning outcome in this case left for the Patent Trolls over at 1st Tech. Even if they are finally able to sell the domains they stole from us, this will not cover their legal bills to dateand I predict their bills have only just begun with some of the fun I see coming their way."
It appears that 1st Technologies is maintaining the low profile approach to the issue that has characterised its claims to date - no further statements have been issued.
DEVALUED DOMAINS AT ONLINE GAMBLING GROUP
Bodog owner claims confiscated domains have lost value
The owner of the Bodog online gambling group fired another broadside at patent litigation opponent First Technologies this week on his blog Calvin Ayre Life.com, taunting 1st Tech's CEO Dr. Scott Lewis on an alleged decline in the Bodog domains he holds by court order.
The two companies are still locked in litigation over 1st Technologies claim that Bodog infringed patents on Internet technology, which led to Nevada and Washington judges awarding a $49 million default judgement against Bodog, and delivered the Bodog domains into the hands of 1st Technologies. Reacting fast, Bodog launched the new brand Bodog Life.com and continued its online gambling and entertainment facilities with minimal interruption.
Since then, Bodog founder Calvin Ayre has used his blog to repeatedly attack Scott Lewis and his company, describing it as a "patent troll." This has clearly irritated Lewis, who has asked Ayre to desist with the name calling. Judging by Ayre's latest posts that is not going to happen.
This week, Ayre claims that unnamed "domain evaluation experts" have advised him that the old Internet domains held by Lewis have declined in value, whilst the new domains have flourished.
"Although the value of Bodog's old domains has taken a huge hit since Patent Troll Scott Lewis and 1st Technologies launched a patent infringement case against [Bodog], the new Bodoglife.com domain is now worth over $1 million," Ayre writes. In contrast, he reveals that the domains held by Lewis have declined, quoting the following valuations:
Bodog.com domain value Jan. 17, 2007: $692,580
Bodog.com domain value as of Nov. 14, 2007: $264,930
"Well well well if this ain't a kick in the pants then I don't know what is," Ayre crows: "After 2.5 months of having all of Bodog's old domains black holed by the Patent Trolls over at 1st Technologies, domain evaluation experts say Bodog's original domains have lost over 75% of their value, while the new Bodoglife domain is now worth over $1 million dollars and climbing."
The Bodog founder goes on to explain that several factors establish a domain's value, such as traffic (number of daily unique visitors), brandability (presence, relationship with customers, cultural relevance, emotional connection, easy to remember), search engine compatibility (listed in all major search engines, search engine friendly content), page rank (number of relevant websites that link to your site), domain extensions (.com), and linguistics (easy to pronounce) for starters.
"But one of the main determining factorsespecially in the case of Bodog.comis domain parking revenue," Ayre claims. "Why? It's simple: Revenue is a measurable factor and comparisons can be made for revenue to sale price of other domains."
"In our case we still maintain US and international trademarks on Bodog for the areas of entertainment (i.e. we are in many international domains such as Bodog.eu)," Ayre explains. "This means Bodog cannot be trademarked by anyone else. So thiscombined with its having lost all of its search ranking, along with Bodoglife.com now being the top-ranked site for Bodog searchmakes Bodog.com nearly valueless to anyone but us. Anyone who bought Bodog.com, as an example, would immediately be in court with us fighting a trademark case and thus making it difficult to sell for any high amount.
"Scott Lewis and the rest of the Patent Trolls over at 1st Tech really did not understand the Internet or branding when they shut those domains offit was a pretty stupid conclusion to a fairly sophisticated legal muggingthey got so greedy at the last moment that their hormones started making decisionsand instead of quietly telling us they could shut them off and allow us to quietly send them a face-saving payment they went ahead and did it and then sent in that now famous extortion email that we ignored," the Bodog chief taunts, although that last sentence perhaps indicates a solution that might have been.
Ayre ends his current attack with a reminder that Bodog is not in this [1st Technologies] lawsuit, reiterating that the company is "...an assetless ex-supplier that shut down its operations in Sept. 2006 and was doing domain management for us that got sued."
Indicating that the legal battle has some time yet to run, he adds: "This is only a domain rights law issue to Bodog; it's not a patent case from our perspective. There is no winning outcome in this case left for the Patent Trolls over at 1st Tech. Even if they are finally able to sell the domains they stole from us, this will not cover their legal bills to dateand I predict their bills have only just begun with some of the fun I see coming their way."
It appears that 1st Technologies is maintaining the low profile approach to the issue that has characterised its claims to date - no further statements have been issued.
Update
BODOG PATENT CASE GETS TECHNICAL
Online gambling group requests ruling on status of domains
The ongoing and acrimonious patent and domains dispute between 1st Technologies and Bodog Entertainment Group SA took a new direction last week with a novel motion filed by the Bodog legal team.
The motion, filed on November 13 in the same court which ordered the confiscation of Bodog domains in a $47 million default judgement that is still being contested, asks the court to answer a question which has not yet been answered in Washington law:
"Are Internet domain names considered "property" that can be subject to seizure to collect on a judgment?"
For Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A., the answer is a resounding "No," says a statement from the company, which is waiting for a decision, this week.
Specifically, Bodog Entertainment Group have asked the Washington court reconsider its prior ruling granting a writ of execution which permitted 1st Technology LLC to seize thousands of Internet domain names, including domain names that incorporated Bodog trademarks.
Through its lawyers, Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A. points out that there is no previously established case law in the state of Washington which specifically permits Internet domain names to be seized or finds that domain names are "property" that can be seized under Washington law.
Defense team lawyer James Nguyen, an entertainment, intellectual property and Internet law specialist at Foley & Lardner LLP, explained: "This is a new legal issue triggered by the emergence of Internet technology."
Because there are no current legal decisions in Washington about this important point, the defending legal team is asking the Washington judge to look to established law in the state of Virginia, which holds that domain names should not be subject to seizure.
The state of Virginia is an appropriate jurisdiction for legal reference, because the second largest domain name registrar in North America, Network Solutions, is located in Virginia. Virginia courts thus have considerable experience with Internet domain name legal issues.
Furthermore, Nguyen points out that "in a number of jurisdictions, trademarks are not considered assets that are subject to seizure."
Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A.'s legal team therefore argues that domain names which incorporate the Bodog and related trademarks cannot be transferred, because those domain names could not be used by a third party (such as anyone who might purchase the domain name through an Internet auction) without infringing on Bodog trademarks.
As Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A.'s motion argues that if a court does not have the power to permit seizure of trademarks, it likewise should not have the power to seize or transfer domain names which contain those trademarks.
"This is a groundbreaking case in the muddy waters of Internet law, and we are confident that we have many aspects in our favor to [get] some clarity on this issue and have our domains returned to us," said Bodog Founder Calvin Ayre.
The motion was filed on Nov. 13 in the case 1st Technology, LLC v. Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A., Superior Court for State of Washington, County of King, Case No. 07-2-25305-0 SEA, and is currently under consideration before the Honorable John Erlick.
BODOG PATENT CASE GETS TECHNICAL
Online gambling group requests ruling on status of domains
The ongoing and acrimonious patent and domains dispute between 1st Technologies and Bodog Entertainment Group SA took a new direction last week with a novel motion filed by the Bodog legal team.
The motion, filed on November 13 in the same court which ordered the confiscation of Bodog domains in a $47 million default judgement that is still being contested, asks the court to answer a question which has not yet been answered in Washington law:
"Are Internet domain names considered "property" that can be subject to seizure to collect on a judgment?"
For Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A., the answer is a resounding "No," says a statement from the company, which is waiting for a decision, this week.
Specifically, Bodog Entertainment Group have asked the Washington court reconsider its prior ruling granting a writ of execution which permitted 1st Technology LLC to seize thousands of Internet domain names, including domain names that incorporated Bodog trademarks.
Through its lawyers, Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A. points out that there is no previously established case law in the state of Washington which specifically permits Internet domain names to be seized or finds that domain names are "property" that can be seized under Washington law.
Defense team lawyer James Nguyen, an entertainment, intellectual property and Internet law specialist at Foley & Lardner LLP, explained: "This is a new legal issue triggered by the emergence of Internet technology."
Because there are no current legal decisions in Washington about this important point, the defending legal team is asking the Washington judge to look to established law in the state of Virginia, which holds that domain names should not be subject to seizure.
The state of Virginia is an appropriate jurisdiction for legal reference, because the second largest domain name registrar in North America, Network Solutions, is located in Virginia. Virginia courts thus have considerable experience with Internet domain name legal issues.
Furthermore, Nguyen points out that "in a number of jurisdictions, trademarks are not considered assets that are subject to seizure."
Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A.'s legal team therefore argues that domain names which incorporate the Bodog and related trademarks cannot be transferred, because those domain names could not be used by a third party (such as anyone who might purchase the domain name through an Internet auction) without infringing on Bodog trademarks.
As Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A.'s motion argues that if a court does not have the power to permit seizure of trademarks, it likewise should not have the power to seize or transfer domain names which contain those trademarks.
"This is a groundbreaking case in the muddy waters of Internet law, and we are confident that we have many aspects in our favor to [get] some clarity on this issue and have our domains returned to us," said Bodog Founder Calvin Ayre.
The motion was filed on Nov. 13 in the case 1st Technology, LLC v. Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A., Superior Court for State of Washington, County of King, Case No. 07-2-25305-0 SEA, and is currently under consideration before the Honorable John Erlick.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2004
- Location
- Location, Location!
What a fascinating thread... Just spent twenty minutes thoroughly engrossed in the to'ings and fro'ings!
Thank you Jetset specifically for the tempered, balanced summaries of what often verged on becoming heated, biased nonsense.
Ultimately, and regardless of any personal opinion of the man, C.A has built and maintained a hugely successful and largely trusted operation -- in an industry littered with less that reputable people and organisations.
A bold, brash, "fighting talk" response is surely expected from the owner of an organisation that has built it's brand on the slogan "play hard"!
There may be 'out of court settlements', there may be long drawn out procrastinated legal action; there'll inevitably be good and bad publicity on both sides. Ultimately - Bodog aren't going to be disappearing anywhere, anytime soon...
Thank you Jetset specifically for the tempered, balanced summaries of what often verged on becoming heated, biased nonsense.
Ultimately, and regardless of any personal opinion of the man, C.A has built and maintained a hugely successful and largely trusted operation -- in an industry littered with less that reputable people and organisations.
A bold, brash, "fighting talk" response is surely expected from the owner of an organisation that has built it's brand on the slogan "play hard"!
There may be 'out of court settlements', there may be long drawn out procrastinated legal action; there'll inevitably be good and bad publicity on both sides. Ultimately - Bodog aren't going to be disappearing anywhere, anytime soon...
lots0
Banned User - troll posts - flaming
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2006
- Location
- Hell on Earth
Calvin Ayre is full of it.jetset said:
I do agree that the old bodog domain names are losing value everyday they are not up and running.
However, as I posted in the bodog SEO thread https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/bodog-seo-discussion-split.19953/ that was split off of this thread, newbodog.com has been penalized in google for paid links and some other shady SEO stuff and the new bodoglife domain names do not appear in google for any money keywords at all. And if the domain name is penalized and not appearing for money keywords in google, it ain't worth spit.
I thought that Calvin Ayre was a smart guy, he should know that the domain market sets domain name prices, not some unknown, unnamed "experts". bodog.com is worth exactly what someone is will to pay for it and not a penny more.
I asked around and I don't know anyone in the domain name market that thinks that bodog.com or bodoglife.com are worth any more than $50 grand USD to anyone but the folks at Bodog (or those that want leverage to get money out of them).
What could anyone but bodog do with domain name bodog.com anyway? Start a new casino/sportsbook/poker room on the old bodog.com domain name, I'll lay odds that would go over big (sarcastic).... and if I was this Lewis guy, I'd do it, at least he might get his money that way.... lol
Update
BODOG VS. 1ST TECHNOLOGIES LITIGATION CONTINUES
Bodog founder cannot be held in contempt for non-appearance
Bodog seemed to score a few points this week in the peripheral legal skirmishes surrounding its bitter patent and domains dispute with 1st Technologies.
The central issue of a $49 million default judgement issued against Bodog, in which its domains were placed under the control of 1st Technologies remains at the centre of the acrimonious litigation, but Bodog lawyers achieved some relief in the latest exchanges.
The attempt by 1st Technologies to get Bodog founder Calvin Ayre into a Nevada courtroom - a possibility frought with potential personal danger for the high profile online gambling executive - has apparently failed. In a statement, Bodog claims that a federal magistrate judge in Las Vegas ruled in favour of a motion initiated by the [Bodog] defence team stating that Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A. is not a resident of Nevada, and therefore is not subject to examination under Nevada law.
Additionally, the judge ruled that Ayre is not required to appear for examination because he too is not a resident of Nevada.
Therefore a contempt motion by 1st Technology based on Ayre failing to appear for examination in Nevada was denied.
Meanwhile, Ayre's company continued to strengthen its legal position by withdrawing the right of the now defunct Bodog Entertainment Group SA to provide domain management services to various Bodog group businesses, and the group is now insisting that Bodog Entertainment stop using its trademarks and brands.
But it is an action in Washington state that is probably more important than the Nevada skirmishing. A Bodog legal team has launched a request for clarification by the courts (see previous InfoPowa reports) which seeks a decision on whether domain names are property that can be subject to seizure to satisfy a judgment.
This is a pivotal issue in the dispute with 1st Technologies as Bodog fights to recover its confiscated domains, which currently languish and are losing value according to recent independent evaluations. If the court rules that, like the state of Virginia, domain names can not be seized to satisfy a judgement, then the default judgement obtained by 1st Technologies [which is itself being contested] could be in difficulties.
Bodog points out that the outcome of this inquiry could have important implications for the interests of international domain owners registered in Washington state, where there are several prominent domain name registrars. The outcome has the potential to undermine the business viability of Washington State domain registrars. This could possibly lead domain name owners to opt to move their businesses to other states with more favorable legal structures or out of the U.S. altogether and into more domain name protective jurisdictions such as the European Union.
BODOG VS. 1ST TECHNOLOGIES LITIGATION CONTINUES
Bodog founder cannot be held in contempt for non-appearance
Bodog seemed to score a few points this week in the peripheral legal skirmishes surrounding its bitter patent and domains dispute with 1st Technologies.
The central issue of a $49 million default judgement issued against Bodog, in which its domains were placed under the control of 1st Technologies remains at the centre of the acrimonious litigation, but Bodog lawyers achieved some relief in the latest exchanges.
The attempt by 1st Technologies to get Bodog founder Calvin Ayre into a Nevada courtroom - a possibility frought with potential personal danger for the high profile online gambling executive - has apparently failed. In a statement, Bodog claims that a federal magistrate judge in Las Vegas ruled in favour of a motion initiated by the [Bodog] defence team stating that Bodog Entertainment Group, S.A. is not a resident of Nevada, and therefore is not subject to examination under Nevada law.
Additionally, the judge ruled that Ayre is not required to appear for examination because he too is not a resident of Nevada.
Therefore a contempt motion by 1st Technology based on Ayre failing to appear for examination in Nevada was denied.
Meanwhile, Ayre's company continued to strengthen its legal position by withdrawing the right of the now defunct Bodog Entertainment Group SA to provide domain management services to various Bodog group businesses, and the group is now insisting that Bodog Entertainment stop using its trademarks and brands.
But it is an action in Washington state that is probably more important than the Nevada skirmishing. A Bodog legal team has launched a request for clarification by the courts (see previous InfoPowa reports) which seeks a decision on whether domain names are property that can be subject to seizure to satisfy a judgment.
This is a pivotal issue in the dispute with 1st Technologies as Bodog fights to recover its confiscated domains, which currently languish and are losing value according to recent independent evaluations. If the court rules that, like the state of Virginia, domain names can not be seized to satisfy a judgement, then the default judgement obtained by 1st Technologies [which is itself being contested] could be in difficulties.
Bodog points out that the outcome of this inquiry could have important implications for the interests of international domain owners registered in Washington state, where there are several prominent domain name registrars. The outcome has the potential to undermine the business viability of Washington State domain registrars. This could possibly lead domain name owners to opt to move their businesses to other states with more favorable legal structures or out of the U.S. altogether and into more domain name protective jurisdictions such as the European Union.
GrandMaster
Dormant account
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2004
- Location
- UK
He should not feel too smug. The US government declared that it had the right to kidnap anyone wanted for crimes in the US and that the Supreme Court had sanctioned it.
Update
PATENT ENFORCER IN ACTION AGAIN
1st Technology files suit against seven more online gambling operators
Seven more online gambling companies find themselves undergoing the unwelcome patent attention of Dr. Scott Lewis and his 1st Technology company this week, with the costly Bodog dispute apparently at a stalemate.
The St. Louis law firm Simon Passanate has filed patent enforcement suits on behalf of 1st Technology in the Eastern District court of Missouri, citing four Costa Rican, two Norwegian and one Netherlands Antilles companies, according to a report from the online gambling information portal Gambling 911
The companies were named as Digital Gaming Solutions SA, Costa Rica International Sports, Action Poker Gaming Enterprises and SBG Global in Costa Rica; Playsafe Holding AS and eCom Enterprises in Norway and Digital Gaming Network, Ltd., in the Netherlands Antilles jurisdiction.
As was the case with Bodog and an earlier and now settled case against Sportingbet, the plaintiff alleges infringement of the 1st Technology US patent 5 564 001, issued in 2001 and entitled Method and System for Interactively Transmitting Information Over A Network Which Requires Reduced Bandwidth.
According to the 911 report, the plaintiff seeks an immediate halt to further patent infringement, treble damages and the impoundment and destruction of all infringing products.
Anthony G. Simon, representing 1st Technology commented: 1st Technology is a leading technology licensing company that invests considerable resources in developing its intellectual property and is dedicated to protecting and enforcing the same. Simon's law firm has an impressive track record in intellectual property actions.
Dr. Lewis, who heads up 1st Technology, told 911: "Our initial goal here, as in all of our cases, is to reach swift and fair settlements that respect our intellectual property rights for companies with U.S. facing operations and utilize our patents...if we are unable to reach a swift resolution of the dispute, we move forward quickly and apply all of our resources to enforce all of our U.S. legal rights."
Dr. Lewis and his company have been embroiled in a long running and bitterly acrimonious dispute with the Bodog group and its erstwhile CEO Calvin Ayre in recent months (see previous InfoPowa reports) following the award of a $48 million default judgement against Bodog and the confiscation of its domains, forcing an extensive re-branding exercise by the online gambling group. Ayre has consistently claimed that service of the court documents was not effected.
PATENT ENFORCER IN ACTION AGAIN
1st Technology files suit against seven more online gambling operators
Seven more online gambling companies find themselves undergoing the unwelcome patent attention of Dr. Scott Lewis and his 1st Technology company this week, with the costly Bodog dispute apparently at a stalemate.
The St. Louis law firm Simon Passanate has filed patent enforcement suits on behalf of 1st Technology in the Eastern District court of Missouri, citing four Costa Rican, two Norwegian and one Netherlands Antilles companies, according to a report from the online gambling information portal Gambling 911
The companies were named as Digital Gaming Solutions SA, Costa Rica International Sports, Action Poker Gaming Enterprises and SBG Global in Costa Rica; Playsafe Holding AS and eCom Enterprises in Norway and Digital Gaming Network, Ltd., in the Netherlands Antilles jurisdiction.
As was the case with Bodog and an earlier and now settled case against Sportingbet, the plaintiff alleges infringement of the 1st Technology US patent 5 564 001, issued in 2001 and entitled Method and System for Interactively Transmitting Information Over A Network Which Requires Reduced Bandwidth.
According to the 911 report, the plaintiff seeks an immediate halt to further patent infringement, treble damages and the impoundment and destruction of all infringing products.
Anthony G. Simon, representing 1st Technology commented: 1st Technology is a leading technology licensing company that invests considerable resources in developing its intellectual property and is dedicated to protecting and enforcing the same. Simon's law firm has an impressive track record in intellectual property actions.
Dr. Lewis, who heads up 1st Technology, told 911: "Our initial goal here, as in all of our cases, is to reach swift and fair settlements that respect our intellectual property rights for companies with U.S. facing operations and utilize our patents...if we are unable to reach a swift resolution of the dispute, we move forward quickly and apply all of our resources to enforce all of our U.S. legal rights."
Dr. Lewis and his company have been embroiled in a long running and bitterly acrimonious dispute with the Bodog group and its erstwhile CEO Calvin Ayre in recent months (see previous InfoPowa reports) following the award of a $48 million default judgement against Bodog and the confiscation of its domains, forcing an extensive re-branding exercise by the online gambling group. Ayre has consistently claimed that service of the court documents was not effected.
Similar threads
- Sticky
