i'm sure you've got a ton of hard evidence to back that up too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaKBZ3tyweo

You have common law TM rights to your own image and name. In the poker world, he'd have no problem demonstrating that he's the only Jimmy Fricke of notoriety and that the domain was a bad faith registration.

As with Uzi Nissan registering Nissan.com before the internet mattered, if it were registered by someone else named Jimmy Fricke who played poker, it would be a 'tough ****' case but you can't register domain names on the basis of capitalizing on other peoples businesses or personage.

A recent UDRP loss was Graceland.com.
If the Church of Holy Grace owned it and used it as a website for their Sunday services, the Elvis Presley estate wouldn't have had a case but if you advertise Elvis stuff there, you've created your own problem.

Its totally standard for people to 'discover' registering domain names, go on a drunken spree registering all sorts of garbage they think up without having any clue that there are trademark laws in play. Here's a case of that happening.

http://tcattorney.typepad.com/domain...soft-sues.html

Domains are like guns. You can buy one very easily but if you don't understand what you're doing, you can hurt yourself.

So Dutch had to give all his winnings to 2+2? So he's basically in a bunch of makeup?

Haha, will be using this!

not anymore!

Are you sure you are not getting mixed up with copyright?

I thought trademark protection was solely from registering your name/title/sign.

Sent from my GT-I9507 using 2+2 Forums

Yep, I misspoke. (R), not TM.
Point being, you can't just go register TheNameOfSomeoneFamous.com or MichaelJordanBasketball.com and expect to use it commercially to profit off them.

There's a small bit of fair use traction if you're using it totally non-profit but you run into a gushy legal world when you start using other peoples protected IP or the image of famous people in a 'non profit' way.

LOL

Event 33 ($1,000 NLHE) is now complete and it’s the controversial Dutch Boyd who has claimed the win. Boyd has made plenty of enemies in the poker world following claims of cybersquatting and prior to that the lost deposits when his unlicensed PokerSpot client went under. He didn’t appear to be short of support though at the final table, where he outlasted everyone to claim his third WSOP bracelet and win the $288,744 first prize.

http://www.highstakesdb.com/4864-dut...wsop-2014.aspx

People were probably cheering him in hopes he would pay them back their Poker Spot money.

It could be that Boyd didn't take the money and it was the payment processors, but I think he shot himself in the foot with his promises to make it right.

There way a buyout offer that would have made the players whole and was turned down. Heard a couple versions of the reasons. !. Dutch didn't get enough money out of it. 2. Dutch refused to accept a non-compete clause as part of the agreement.

Either way both he and the players ended up with nothing when no other offers came along.

Event #33 6 Handed NLHE $288k

I'm reading his book, his version of how Poker Spot imploded is interesting, as well as his description of his mental illness. I know he tried to gravy train the 2 plus 2 name , which is weak. But I'm rooting for the guy.

If you believe Dutch's version of what happened in his book, Golden Palace agreed to pay back all the players, then reneged using misleading language in the contract he signed. The way he tells it, he didn't get a dime.

lol my god has he aged terribly, looks like a 50 year old man and he's 34 years old

he looks like someone I wouldnt trust with my 5$.

I don't really have much of a horse in this race but having read the book, he gets very specific about individual people at Golden Palace and how they ****ed him and the rest of the Pokerspot team over. Like "if-it-weren't-true-there-could-be-a-lawsuit" specific, which, if anything, gives his version more credibility in my mind.

After reading his version of what happened (as above), I'm a bit more sympathetic to what he was trying to do at the end of the Pokerspot thing.

Seems like he was trying to do what was best for everyone and got burned because of his lack of business experience. I'm less inclined to believe there was malice, as in the FTP case for example.

I have a Dutch Boyd question. He's quoted on the WSOP website after his win as saying....“It's not like this win is going to change my life, or anything. It’s not life-changing money for me." Now wasn't he just flat broke and couldn't get a job as a paper boy and begging for money and now all of a sudden winning 288 thousand isn't life changing money to him?

Although I think this was a money grab from Two Plus Two, I think this is the real problem.

"$25,000 in statutory damages and $33,985 in attorney fees. " Once again the slime ball lawyers being the real winners.

It's not life changing if he owes $500,000 or if he was backed and in makeup.

Blown away by what Gavin Smith had to say about the Boyd v Mason situation. Heard Gavin go off on Mason on the Mark Hoke Show. Is it true Dutch offered to give the web name back and was sued anyway?

After taxes, owing people money, debts (credit cards, car payment/purchase) how much is left? Enough to buy into the wsop main and a couple other prelims. Not gonna change his life. The guy who plays online in mommys basement, that's who's life changes with 288k, until he blows through it and has to go back to mommys basement

Why bother reading a thread. Just toss out questions that have been answered 10 times.

He probably owes that much or more and maybe did not have all of himself in the tournament. I wish players would be totally honest about their staking arrangements after tournaments, it would be interesting to understand the dynamics of the live tournament scene and all the deals that are made.

because that's any of your ****ing business