Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 61 to 75 of 75

Thread: Mason Malmutt on Annie, Howard, Poker World Magazine, lawsuits, Dutch. from 4 pokercast

  1. #61
    Cubic Zirconia
    Reputation
    11
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    5
    Load Metric
    65613017
    I'm not going to post this on 2p2 cause I don't want to deal with getting banned regarding something I don't really care that much about the case but I did have some interest in seeing how it played out.

    I'm not taking any sides here but I'm a bit of a stickler when things seem to be wrong.

    If you're not familiar with domain marketing.... this is how it works.

    People register a bunch of domain names. Usually hundreds or thousands at a time. The cost of registering a domain name is fairly cheap as is hosting a simple website with ads.

    Different people have different techniques on how they select domain names. With the volume it's mainly automated at least partially. People may look up various sources and then come up with derivations on the name. Some people may just sit and type up a list of domain names and then maybe have a program that comes up with additional versions. I don't know how Boyd did any of this but these are common techniques. Sine he's a poker player and familiar with 2p2 I wouldn't be surprised if he knowingly inserted twoplustwopoker.com in his list or at least seeded some algorithm with variations of the words '2' 'plus' and '2'.

    Once the list is made the domains are bulk registered to see if any of them are not taken. Of those that are successfully registered the domain marketer has some scripts that generate these very simple websites that contain keywords and some sort of revenue generating links. Based on the content of this site I'm guessing that this was the same template Boyd used for all his poker related domain names. It's pretty generic. If you understand a little HTML and Javascript you can look at the HTML source on archive.org and figure out what the site would have looked like.

    Of the domains that get registered, most won't make any money. The hope is that some will make enough money to cover the expenses. The expenses are pretty minimal. At the time you could register domain names for less than $7 at some places. If a domain winds up generating more than $7 a year it's profitable but you need them to generate enough to pay for the unprofitable domains to make the whole thing worth while.

    Search engines have always tried to filter these results out of their search results because the sites don't offer any value to the visitor. They don't get much traffic and therefor not much revenue.

    In addition to making revenue off the ads, reselling domain names is part of the revenue model. If you wind up registering a domain name that someone else wants then you can sell it to them. Let's say I just had an idea to start a company called ALKJDFAKSJDFSLJDFDFJSDF and I want to register ALKJDFAKSJDFSLJDFDFJSDF.com but see it's already taken. I'd have to buy the domain from the current owner.

    Legal problems arise when you wind up registering a domain name that infringes on someone's trademark as Boyd's domain did in this case.

    Boyd was right when he said this wasn't traditional cybersquatting. Maybe the definition has changed but initially cybersquatting was defined as someone claiming trademark domains that had not yet been registered or that expired. Let's say you're Coca-Cola and it's 1994 you decide to build a website but someone registered that domain name in 1993. That's more of a traditional cybersquatting. Also, let's say it's 1995 and Coca-Cola doesn't think the web is going to pick up and they decide to stop putting money into their website and let the domain name expire or maybe they forgot to renew it for some other reason and someone else winds up registering it as soon as it expires. Those examples are more what cybersquatting is. Legally, other violations related to domain names may have been lumped into cybersquatting legislation. Things like misspellings and variations on the name. Technically, that's not "squatting" in my view. That doesn't mean they aren't infringing on trademarks.

    The traditional cybersquatting type domains can actually be fairly profitable. Let's say there's a popular website that has a ton of links pointing to it but the owner forgets and lets the domain expire and someone else snatches it up. You put up a different site with links and for a while you're still going to get a lot of traffic to the site until search engines realize there was a change. Even then you'll still get traffic from other pages that still link to pages that were on the original site.

    If you're not familiar with how IP attorney's work...

    People probably have a good sense of how attorney's that deal with Intellectual Property work based on what they've read related to what's been going on with MPAA and RIAA over the years. This is my personal take on how things probably went down.

    Greenbreg Traurig, 2p2's attorney in this case, were dealing with a lot of these types of cases at the time. You can find a press release they put out bragging about being the top firm bring up these types of cases.

    I don't know if GT was 2p2's attorney before this case or not but it appears that GT was the one that brought up the infringement to 2p2 based on what Malmuth said in the first post and not that 2p2 discovered the infringement and sought legal help.

    Lawyers make money by suing people and threatening to sue people. Since GT was so big in this field I would assume they used similar tactics that RIAA and MPAA employ. If I were them what I would probably do is build some software that searches the millions of domain names that are already registered as well as the many thousands of domain names that get registered every dayand compare it with a trademark database to see if I could identify any potentially infringing names. That narrows down the field where maybe an intern or paralegal can go over the list and narrow it down further which then goes to an attorney who will pick out the cases they think will be profitable.

    An attorney can only sue on behalf of a client so at some point a bunch of form letters go out to all the trademark owners indicating that infringing domains were found. Language probably includes how trademark owners, unlike copyright holders, can lose their trademark protections if they don't actively protect their trade names, which is true. Letter would probably also mention that there's a $100,000 statutory maximum award and how successful GT has been in the past. It's basically a targeted sales letter. GT thinks they can make money by representing the case and hopes the receiver accepts the offer for representation.

    Based on what Malmuth wrote in that post, it sounds like part of that letter indicated that GT would have to do more digging to determine who was behind the anonymous registration and 2p2 would have to agree to hire GT to start billing hours on the case. I don't know how GT works but it's possible they may also be looking to dupe some companies into paying for a more thorough audit that may or may not result in something that lead to a case.

    Once the clock starts ticking GT identifies the domain owner and sends them a letter letting them know their client's intent to resolve the trademark infringement and states what the statutory maximum is in these cases ($100k) and tries to get the infringer to shit his pants and send a check.

    At some point attorney's may leave it at that unless they think they have a really strong case they are likely to win at trial. They really haven't invested much at this point. It's very similar to how domain marketers automate a lot of the work and then hope to hit enough profitable cases to make all the work worth it. In this case Boyd's domain was clearly infringing on 2p2's trademark and they were probably happy to let it go to trial because it means more hours they can bill with a high probability of success. From 2p2's perspective it might be a freeroll if GT takes these strong cases on a type of contingency basis since the legislation would also award legal fees to the plaintiff's attorney.

    Take away the names like 2p2 being a site everyone loves and Boyd being a person that ran a site that stole a lot of money from poker players. What you have appears to be.

    1. Some dude registers a bunch of domain names to try and make some money.
    2. If he makes any money at all off that domain it's probably minor since by that point all the search engines were pretty good at filtering these thin parked domain sites. Since the domain was left to expire it probably wasn't very profitable.
    3. One or more of those domain names infringe a company's trademark and a lawyer notices it. They tell the company that their IP is being infringed and they can defend them in the matter. They say they don't even need to prove how much the infringement actually cost the company and can still sue for up to $100k.
    4. Company says free money? Hell yeah!
    5. Lawyers gonna lawyer.

    If Boyd wasn't involved this probably wouldn't be that interesting to most people in poker.

     
    Comments
      
      Hockey Guy: Good info rep

  2. #62
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10111
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65613017
    First off, thanks for registering and posting that information here. Very interesting stuff.

    However, I do have to disagree with some of your conclusions.

    Keep in mind that I am no Mason Malmuth apologist. I am banned from 2+2 for an extremely stupid reason (basically he tried to make me apologize to someone he doesn't know for something I wrote on THIS site, and banned me when I wouldn't). So basically I think Mason is a big prick and dislike the guy, which is too bad because I mostly like the 2+2 forums, which have succeeded in spite of Mason, rather than because of him.

    With that said, I believe cybersquatters are scum, and they are basically leeches who attempt to make money from others' hard work and/or brand recognition.

    I do believe that Dutch registered a large number of domains at the same time. I don't think his registration of twoplustwopoker.com was a grand scheme to get rich off of Mason's hard work. He likely sat at his computer one day, registering every poker-related domain he could imagine, including several that were similar to existing companies.

    Like you said, you can only make money in mass domain registration when the profitable domains make enough to cover the losses of the unprofitable ones. I'm sure he patted himself on the back for "twoplustwopoker.com", knowing it would draw in a fair number of confused people searching for 2+2, and thus would give his various affiliate links some good exposure. I don't think he believed he would get rich off twoplustwopoker.com, but likely at least believed it would turn some kind of profit.

    More importantly, he was directly looking to profit from the recognition of Mason's brand of twoplustwo. This is clear because the term "twoplustwo" itself otherwise has NOTHING to do with poker. Its sole association with poker is due to Mason's well-known company name. This is what I consider to be blatant cybersquatting, even if not the traditional form of cybersquatting where someone grabs a domain name related to a company before the company itself can. It's still the act of registering a domain for profit, intending to receive traffic meant for another company. It is deceitful to both the website visitors and the company you are imitating. Basically, it's a scumbag move.

    It is important to distinguish the difference between twoplustwopoker.com and a cybersquatted domain using a common poker term. For example, Haley Hintze writes for a site called flushdraw.net. If I registered flushdrawpoker.net and also covered poker news, it would be somewhat unethical, but not as easy to prove ill intent. This is because the term "flush draw" indeed has to do with poker, so flushdraw.net cannot claim that they have to exclusive right to run websites with the name "flush draw". It's a general term which doesn't belong to anyone.

    However, here Dutch Boyd very clearly intended to grab visitors intending to visit Mason's company's website, and profit from that traffic himself. Dutch does not deserve that traffic or those profits, just as I can't open up a hotel on the Vegas strip called "Belaggio" and hope to snag people who don't realize the different spelling.

    Simply put, even though I dislike him, I fully believe in his moral and legal rights to receive any and all profits derived from Two Plus Two Publishing. Dutch was trying to steal some of that, even if in very small quantities.

    Regarding your comments about Greenberg-Traurig, while I believe your claim that they specialize in these sorts of cases, and hope to scare people into settlements with $100,000 lawsuit threats, I can't condemn them for what they are doing. You compared it to the MPAA/RIAA lawyers, but I disagree. What bothers me (and most others) about the MPAA/RIAA is that they are attempting to squeeze money out of people who are not attempting to profit off of their work. While I do believe the MPAA/RIAA have a right to fight piracy, I do think that suing individual downloaders/uploaders for thousands of dollars is ridiculous, as these people are not profiting or reselling the product. To me there is a huge difference between obtaining others' work for free and profiting from others' work. The latter is MUCH worse.

    I have no sympathy for cybersquatters when they get threatening letters by Greenberg-Traurig. I cannot feel bad for scumbags getting comeuppance for their actions.

    I do agree with you that this case generated more public interest because it involved Boyd, rather than some anonymous squatter. However, I can't feel sorry for Boyd here, either. He knew exactly what he was doing, and it backfired.

  3. #63
    Cubic Zirconia
    Reputation
    11
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    5
    Load Metric
    65613017
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post
    First off, thanks for registering and posting that information here. Very interesting stuff.

    However, I do have to disagree with some of your conclusions.
    Odd considering I tried to avoid making any conclusions, especially not the ones you appear to think I made.

    Nowhere did I say that cybersquatting or infringing on anyone's intellectual property is okay. I indicated I believed the domain name to be clearly infringing 2p2's trademark. I merely shared my knowledge of how the process works.

    Nowhere did I condemn what GT was doing just pointing out how I believe the most likely do it. I think it's pretty clever. They have the potential to make money from the trademark holder by conducting a more thorough investigation and/or from the infringer. A better comparison might have been to those asset recovery firms that send out notices to people with unclaimed property that offer to get it for them for a fee? My comparison to the MPAA/RIAA was about the process I assume they use to be able to find the volume of cases they do. MPAA/RIAA and other attorneys that are looking for copyright violations have developed software that scans for such violations.

    Considering search engines were pretty good at filtering these types of thin content parked domains by that point in time and how much content 2p2 has and how established the site is on the internet I have a hard time believing that it would have gotten much if any traffic.

    I've been following the case for a while when I first learned that Boyd was being sued for $100k. I had some knowledge about domain marketing and was something I could easily do if I chose and was thinking "crap if he made $100k off this one crappy site I should look into it more."

    Turns out the $100k is the statutory maximum a plaintiff can sue for without having to prove any actual damages. Final ruling was for around $25k in damages but nowhere can I find how the judge came up with that number. I was hoping that at the conclusion of the trial it would be revealed how much the site actually made or how much traffic it generated so I can compare it to my assumptions.

  4. #64
    Cubic Zirconia
    Reputation
    11
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    5
    Load Metric
    65613017
    In this video Boyd says what I suspected, that the domain didn't generate any money.

    Forget who the parties are in the suit. What are you thoughts on the amount of the judgment?

  5. #65
    PFA Emeritus Crowe Diddly's Avatar
    Reputation
    1954
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    6,682
    Load Metric
    65613017
    Quote Originally Posted by MicroRoller View Post
    In this video Boyd says what I suspected, that the domain didn't generate any money.
    Boyd did indeed say that, of COURSE he said that, but why would you believe him? He refused to turn over any docs or evidence related to the site, so his word is kinda worthless on this topic. The only person who could prove how much the site made or didn't make is dutchie, and he punted on that opportunity.

  6. #66
    Cubic Zirconia
    Reputation
    11
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    5
    Load Metric
    65613017
    Quote Originally Posted by Crowe Diddly View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MicroRoller View Post
    In this video Boyd says what I suspected, that the domain didn't generate any money.
    Boyd did indeed say that, of COURSE he said that, but why would you believe him? He refused to turn over any docs or evidence related to the site, so his word is kinda worthless on this topic. The only person who could prove how much the site made or didn't make is dutchie, and he punted on that opportunity.
    I have some relevant experience and by that point in time search engines had gotten very good at detecting those types of parked pages that don't contain any useful content and were not including them in search results so it wouldn't be getting much in the way of search traffic and it's not like it was an expired domain that would have had natural links.

  7. #67
    Diamond Hockey Guy's Avatar
    Reputation
    1233
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    7,629
    Load Metric
    65613017
    Quote Originally Posted by MicroRoller View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Crowe Diddly View Post

    Boyd did indeed say that, of COURSE he said that, but why would you believe him? He refused to turn over any docs or evidence related to the site, so his word is kinda worthless on this topic. The only person who could prove how much the site made or didn't make is dutchie, and he punted on that opportunity.
    I have some relevant experience and by that point in time search engines had gotten very good at detecting those types of parked pages that don't contain any useful content and were not including them in search results so it wouldn't be getting much in the way of search traffic and it's not like it was an expired domain that would have had natural links.
    Did this site make Dutch a bunch of money? Probably not.
    Is the judgement kinda insane? Yeah.
    Is Mason a big prick? Yeah.
    Do I feel sorry for Dutch or should anybody? Not in the least.

    If I had the money & oppurtunity I would have done this to Dutch just to fuck with him. He's a POS & a cancer on the game & does nothing that is beneficial to the game we all love. You could also probably write that sentence about Mason too but this isn't about him. If Dutch had made any good faith attempt, & I mean even the slightest, to pay back the money from his failed pokerspot poker room I may have a different take on things but the fact is he NEVER did. As a matter of fact, he went so far as to turn down a deal that would have gotten all the players paid but he "wanted" that & a bigger payday for himself.

    There's a petition going around to ban Howard Lederer from the community & everybody(well almost from what I can see) will get paid in the end. Nobody is getting paid from pokerspot & never will & he walks around poker rooms & the WSOP like he's a star & owns the place with no repercussions. Dutch walks around with this "oh whoa is me" attitude when, the facts are, he's brought it all upon himself.
    (•_•) ..
    ∫\ \___( •_•)
    _∫∫ _∫∫ɯ \ \

    Quote Originally Posted by Hockey Guy
    I'd say good luck in the freeroll but I'm pretty sure you'll go on a bender to self-sabotage yourself & miss it completely or use it as the excuse of why you didn't cash.

  8. #68
    Cubic Zirconia
    Reputation
    11
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    5
    Load Metric
    65613017
    Quote Originally Posted by Hockey Guy View Post
    Did this site make Dutch a bunch of money? Probably not.
    Is the judgement kinda insane? Yeah.
    Is Mason a big prick? Yeah.
    Do I feel sorry for Dutch or should anybody? Not in the least.
    That pretty much sums it up but I kind of feel sorry for the other guy that wound up getting a $150k default judgement. Especially if it's true that 2p2's attorney told him not to show up to court. See http://www.reddit.com/r/poker/commen...lsely_sued_by/

  9. #69
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10111
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65613017
    Great post from a 2+2 member named "loggy", accurately assessing the situation:

    Quote Originally Posted by loggy
    This situation is very easy to explain. Dutch Boyd took a shot when he registered the name. It was a bad faith registration, and the intent was to infringe on the Two Plus Two trademark. Dutch Boyd had no idea that the name would not derive significant revenue. He almost assuredly expected that it would generated more traffic than it did. If that had occurred, he would have then been able to really infringe and profit from that traffic.

    As to Mason Malmuth. He has the right to protect the Two Plus Two trademark. Also, if he doesn't protect his right once he realizes that someone is infringing on it, if there is a big problem down the road, his lack of aggressiveness can be used against him. On Mason's first inquiry about the domain name, Mason would have no idea how much traffic and revenue was being generated. It could have been quite significant, but he did not know. Once Mason goes down this road, spending his time and company resources on this, he has to finish the job, or else he will forever be chasing people down and asking for similar names to be returned to him.

    Mason rightly assumes that most everyone attempting to infringe on the Two Plus Two trademark will likely be at least a somewhat frequent lurker/poster at this site, and if Mason can take a stand and go the extra mile against Dutch Boyd, a known poker name, then it will in all likelihood deter a number of potential would-be infringers, and it will save Mason and others at Two Plus Two a lot of time, money, and effort in the future.

    Once in a while, you have to take actions that may seem like overkill to those not involved. In Mason's, and Two Plus Two's defense, anything less than a public burial of Dutch Boyd doesn't make any financial sense, and ethically speaking, Dutch Boyd is the one who has unclean hands. If you rob a bank and get caught, justice demands that the punishment is more than just a simple return of the money, otherwise, everyone can take a free shot. If you attempt to rob someone on the street, and it turns out that they only have $2 on them, you cannot argue that your robbery is less of a crime than the robbery of the bank.

    That settles the legal and ethical questions. Now let's talk about what most of you are actually talking about.

    Dutch Boyd, though known to have been involved in at least a handful of questionable ethical activities, seems to be a likeable interesting fellow. Throw out the allegedly shady activities, and he appears to be an extremely entertaining person, along the lines of the troubled genius. A likeable manic, bi-polar gentleman. Of course, those who believe that they have been victimized by Dutch Boyd in the past hate him, and others who have been victimized by poker generally, probably are not so fond of him and his alleged past dealings. Most neutral observers with no poker axe to grind would probably find Dutch Boyd an interesting person, with insights that are worth listening to.

    As to Mason Malmuth, his image seems to be that of a curmudgeon. A somewhat soulless, unfunny dinosaur in the poker world. These are exactly the types of poker personalities that the younger crowd despises. The "Nit" who is never at risk of being homeless, and who can enjoy poker for decades on his own terms, paying his bills without owing people money, and likely living a pretty enjoyable normal life, with the freedom to do what he wants.

    Dutch Boyd and Mason Malmuth/Two Plus Two got tangled up in a situation where the risk/shot taker met up with someone who had the staying power/resources to protect himself and put an end to the situation while sending a strong message to others not to mess with him.

    The final point is that Dutch Boyd had some terrible terrible luck in this case. Trademark infringement is a somewhat gray area, especially when it comes to domain names, and the Internet, functionally speaking, was only about 10 years old when Dutch Boyd registered the name back in the mid 2000's. Practically speaking, the Internet was younger than 10 years old at that point. Domain Names have always been a bit like the Wild Wild West. There are still today many people who profit from infringing on trademarks. On blatant abuses using potentially valuable high traffic domain names, they will often disguise their ownership, or, if caught red handed, they will simply turn over the name or delete it. But once in a while, a person or company will go the extra mile and go for the knockout punch on the infringer.

    This seems like overkill to the dispassionate observer, but it actually is the deal that those who infringe sign up for. When they register a name in bad faith, they know that a very small percentage of time they will be faced with a situation that can turn very bad. Just like when someone drinks and drives. Most times they will not get caught. Sometimes they will get a DUI, and every once in a while, someone who may have had only one or two drinks will wipe out a family and be staring at a manslaughter charge. But it all starts with the initial bad idea of drinking and driving. There are a range of possibilities that can happen on the way home, and the truly horrendous result can certainly be explained as being bad luck.

    Dutch Boyd's actions are very light if put on the scale of moral wrongs. His intentions were not good, but it still doesn't qualify as an outrageous human action. But Mason Malmuth had to do what he had to do. He really had no choice. I don't think they will let Dutch Boyd off the hook. Yes, they have proved their point, and will likely deter others in the future from infringing on the Two Plus Two trademark, but it will probably be an unpayable judgement forever, and my guess would be that Mason and Two Plus Two would be fine with that.

    If I had one suggestion it would be for Mason and Dutch Boyd to agree to a small settlement, with a strict confidentiality agreement. Neither side would be allowed to make a public or private statement about the settlement. That way Dutch could put this behind him, and Mason and Two Plus Two could still get full value from the fact that they have a large judgment that will deter others. But in reality, there is no reason for Mason and Two Plus Two to give up that hard won leverage. They are probably content to have the publicized judgment. Getting paid is just gravy. They did what they had to do.

    So maybe a medium sized settlement the next time Dutch Boyd makes a score would be best for all.

     
    Comments
      
      Hockey Guy: I assumed loggy was you when I read it.

  10. #70
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10111
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65613017
    I do want to add a few things:

    1) I don't think Dutch "parked" the page. It looks like a custom page he quickly threw together (and perhaps ran on many of his other domains), full of affiliate links. Here is a copy of the twoplustwopoker.com in May, 2006: https://web.archive.org/web/20060511...stwopoker.com/ ... Notice the "win big money at party poker or the starluck casino" line near the top. That's very uncommon language for parked pages, which tend to be very generic in nature and don't outwardly advertise specific brands (even if those specific brands are contained in links).

    2) I do believe that Dutch probably didn't know how much revenue that specific page had made, since he was likely using the same affiliate codes for all of his domains. I believe he didn't answer Mason's demands as to how much he made both because he didn't know, and because he was afraid it would somehow be used against him. Sometimes, when confronted by opposing attorneys with demands, your best course of action is to say very little and provide the least amount of information.

    3) I believe the main reason for Dutch's lack of cooperation was that he didn't want to pay the likely thousands of dollars of attorney's fees that had already been spent on researching the owner of twoplustwopoker.com. He probably felt he was better off taking his chances in court, hence his lack of cooperation.

    4) I also believe that Dutch was on the arrogant side, and probably got too overconfident regarding his chances to beat Mason in court. He was probably irritated that he was willing to hand over the domain, yet Mason still wanted him to cough up thousands in attorneys fees up to that point.

    5) There is an important fact missing here, and perhaps someone can either point to Mason's explanation or ask him. twoplustwopoker.com had a "Contact Us" link. Rather than spend money on an expensive attorney to figure out the true owner of the site, did Mason ever simply utilize the link and demand the return of the domain? If so, what happened? If Dutch refused (or ignored him), I fully understand Mason's actions.

    6) Mason did have a right to a return of all revenue that Dutch earned from twoplustwopoker.com, and if that couldn't be determined, it needed to be approximated. If Dutch refused to do this, again, I understand Mason's actions. However, I am concerned that the demand for revenue reports was accompanied with a demand for attorney's fees already incurred.

    7) How much was Mason asking for in attorney's fees, after his attorney initially made contact with Boyd?

     
    Comments
      
      Hockey Guy: Not saying my opinion has changed.

  11. #71
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10111
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65613017
    Dutch responds on 2+2!

    Quote Originally Posted by DutchB
    Quote Originally Posted by Mason Malmuth
    One thing Boyd did was to shield the ownership of the website, and it took our legal team some time to identify him as the owner. If he only thought that www.twoplustwo.com was good for $5 a month and would receive little traffic, why would he do this?
    I really hate coming on here and responding to you, Mason... but this is a lie. Maybe you believe it, but anybody with access to a historic whois search can plainly see that I didn't hide behind a privacy service for the five years I had registered twoplustwopoker.com. I'd encourage anyone to check.

    I'd also point out that I did, in fact, send over the full five years of traffic history to your lawyer before you filed your lawsuit. He said he doubted the validity of the info, so I had the registrar (Fabulous.com) send him a verified copy of the traffic history. The total parked revenue came out to $133 over five years... when you subtract the yearly registration cost, we're not talking about $5/mo. We're talking about $5/yr.

    The domain was registered on the same day as around 500 other <keyword>poker.com domain names. I sent your lawyers that list as well. It wasn't an intentional shot... it was taking an automated method of google search terms ending in "poker" and adding .com. I didn't make a big deal of this in the lawsuit because automated methods don't shield a registrar from registering the wrong name. But it wasn't me intentionally taking a shot at you.

    The "developed" site was actually just a parked page automatically served up by the registrar. I don't think you really understand the difference, and that's ok... most people wouldn't.

    I can understand how you feel, Mason. You and I are actually very similar because someone else registered "DutchBoydPoker.com" several years ago, so I know exactly how you feel. The only difference is I didn't feel the need to make a federal case out of it.

    I'm sure in your world, Mason, you're the reasonable one here. But maybe you'll at least confirm that I personally called you asking to meet and try and resolve this matter, and you just had your lawyer call me back and insist that all communication go through them. And the settlement attempts you made were just to demand $15,000 after the domain had expired and your lawyers had picked it up for reg fee.

    I've already spent way too much time thinking about this. You ruined several holidays and caused a lot of stress for no good reason that I can see. I fought a good fight and lost. GG. Hopefully I'll be able to clear makeup this summer and pay off your judgment, and then we can put it behind us and forget about it.

     
    Comments
      
      Hockey Guy: Not sure what this has to do with choice center or a cult but what do I know.

  12. #72
    Cubic Zirconia propoker's Avatar
    Reputation
    17
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    40
    Load Metric
    65613017
    I would agree with much of your post Druff.

    In regard to #6, this is pure conjecture as I am not in the position to ask Mason's lawyer for his reasoning. I would think that in such a blatant case of trademark infringement where legal action is most likely, you would want to know exactly who you were communicating with instead of scaring them off with a blind cease and desist email.

    Couple new points. I pointed out in the thread that one of the pokerstars referral codes in the site's coding gives the affiliate referral to pokersiteonline.com which is very close to the name of another very large affiliate site, pokersourceonline.com. The ownership of pokersiteonline.com is hidden. Another knock-off url was also in the code, http://www-fulltilt-poker.com the ownership of this site is also hidden. See the pattern here?

    Dutch knew exactly what he was doing with those names and it wasn't just a case of randomizing poker related urls as he claims.

  13. #73
    Owner Dan Druff's Avatar
    Reputation
    10111
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    54,626
    Blog Entries
    2
    Load Metric
    65613017
    Quote Originally Posted by propoker View Post
    I would agree with much of your post Druff.

    In regard to #6, this is pure conjecture as I am not in the position to ask Mason's lawyer for his reasoning. I would think that in such a blatant case of trademark infringement where legal action is most likely, you would want to know exactly who you were communicating with instead of scaring them off with a blind cease and desist email.

    Couple new points. I pointed out in the thread that one of the pokerstars referral codes in the site's coding gives the affiliate referral to pokersiteonline.com which is very close to the name of another very large affiliate site, pokersourceonline.com. The ownership of pokersiteonline.com is hidden. Another knock-off url was also in the code, http://www-fulltilt-poker.com the ownership of this site is also hidden. See the pattern here?

    Dutch knew exactly what he was doing with those names and it wasn't just a case of randomizing poker related urls as he claims.
    Yes, I've been reading your arguments in the 2+2 threads, and most people have no clue what they're talking about.

    You clearly found Dutch's affiliate IDs in various spots on his pages. For example, you found what was almost definitely Dutch's UB affiliate ID in one of the URLs.

    This means that, as I suspected, the pages weren't parked. The "parking" was a lame excuse being used in court, but it's likely not the truth.

    I also LOL'd at Dutch's claim that this was an "automated" process of registering domains related to poker terms. There was nothing automated about this, except perhaps Dutch wrote a program that takes domains he feeds to it and quickly fills out the registration forms (thus saving him the hassle of typing in his name and address 500 times).

    Computers are really good at some things and really bad at others. They are great at analyzing large amounts of data quickly, and drawing logical conclusions from them. For example, if I asked a computer, "What color is the sky?", it could analyze every webpage related to "sky" and a color, and come up that overwhelmingly webpages associate the sky with the color blue. The computer would come back with the correct answer of "blue", despite not actually having a real understanding of the sky actually being blue. At the same time, computers are poor at abstract, fuzzy, or emotional thinking. If I asked a computer, "There's a girl next door that I'm trying to ask out on a date, but I don't want it to be awkward afterwards if she rejects me. How do I get this done with subtlety where I can deny that's what I meant if she says no?" The computer can't answer this one, because it involves understanding human nature and human emotions. At best, the computer could search for articles about similar situations and parrot them, but couldn't give its own advice.

    Similarly, it takes a human being to think up clever ways of registering URLs where confused people will accidentally visit them, while attempting to visit the original, well-established site. These include:

    twoplustwo.com -> twoplustwopoker.com
    pokersourceonline.com -> pokersiteonline.com
    fulltiltpoker.com -> www-fulltilt-poker.com

    A computer couldn't come up with these clever tricks, as you need to be able to think like a human in order to predict the likely mistakes other humans would make when typing URLs. A computer would come up with dumb URLs such as "pokersourceonlinepoker.com", which wouldn't be likely to catch anyone looking for pokersourceonline.com. It takes a human to think, "Well, pokersourceonline is a long name, and people are so used to the term 'poker site'. Since 'site' and 'source' both start with an 's', I bet replacing 'source' with 'site' would confuse a lot of people into thinking they're at the right place!"

    Bottom line: I'm pretty sure Dutch didn't park the pages, and I'm pretty sure Dutch intentionally registered similar domain names to steal other sites' traffic for profit. It is exactly what it appears to be. Even his company "jacknames.com" suggests exactly what he's doing -- jacking domain names from other companies.

    The only question is whether Mason should have hit him with a nuclear bomb when a stun gun might have been the more appropriate response.

  14. #74
    Cubic Zirconia propoker's Avatar
    Reputation
    17
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    40
    Load Metric
    65613017
    Similarly, it takes a human being to think up clever ways of registering URLs where confused people will accidentally visit them, while attempting to visit the original, well-established site. These include:

    twoplustwo.com -> twoplustwopoker.com
    pokersourceonline.com -> pokersiteonline.com
    fulltiltpoker.com -> www-fulltilt-poker.com
    And to register all of them with hidden ownership, while the generic names did not hide ownership.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Druff View Post

    The only question is whether Mason should have hit him with a nuclear bomb when a stun gun might have been the more appropriate response.
    Boyd brought that on himself for not being honest and upfront when confronted. After a couple of FU's and GFY's in his emails to Mason and GT it was nuke time. Boyd mentioned that the settlement offer from 2p2 was $15K. If Boyd would have cooperated with the investigation the legal hours would have been greatly reduced and the settlement could have been much lower.

    Something that comes up frequently in the conversation is regarding Mason conversing with Dutch. Mason NEVER had any direct communication to Dutch, although Dutch did sent a couple emails to Mason. Dutch was told to run all communication through Mason's lawyers.

  15. #75
    Diamond BCR's Avatar
    Reputation
    2014
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    6,863
    Load Metric
    65613017
    Quote Originally Posted by SixToedPete View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Crowe Diddly View Post
    Worth a listen. Mason talks about some business he had with Annie in the mid-90's, with predictable results. From the pokercast at 4.


     

     

    MP3 file: http://twitc.com/me/821751602678/pokercastmal.mp3

    Touches on some other stuff, like Dutch and the lawsuit at the very end.

    20 minutes-ish.

    Mason says Annie Duke is dishonest, Daniel Negreanu displays bad behavior and Howard Lederer is honorable. Mason also thinks he won vs. Dutch Boyd. Mason actually lost.

    In my opinion, Malmuth's heavy handed approach in dealing with the relatively minor Dutch Boyd domain name incident reveals why the purveyor of two plus two has such a terrible reputation with some in the poker world.

    I've never met Mason Malmuth. I have read his books. They are very good. Still, some feel Mason Malmuth is one of the biggest assholes in poker.

    A little digging reveals why.

    Another Pathetic Mason Malmuth Tale Unfolding...


    Mason Malmuth Scrapping TwoPlusTwo Strategy Archives?...





    The Five Most Hated People in Poker...

    Dutch Boyd made virtually no money off the disputed domain name and actually returned it to Mason's lawyers BEFORE the lawsuit. There was no harm, no foul.

    Yet Malmuth wanted big money from Dutch to end the dispute. What kind of man behaves this way?

    Dutch did not buckle under Malmuth's legal threats so Mason instructed his lawyers to go full throttle with a lawsuit over a $10 domain name.

    Mason Malmuth wasted time and tens of thousands of dollars over nothing.

    He 'wins' a summary judgment against Dutch Boyd. I think he was awarded @$34,000 in lawyer fees and $25,000 in statutory damages. It gets some press so Mason feels like a winner. He is not.

    Dutch Boyd is a very intelligent man. He graduated from law school at 18!

    He knows he can appeal the summary judgement. He knows if a bond is required there are exceptions made for financial hardship. Dutch can drag this out for as long as he desires. During the appeal process Mason cannot execute the judgement. He can't collect a dime.

    Plus, Dutch Boyd holds an ace in the hole. If he doesn't prevail in his appeals, he can file bankruptcy at any time. It's inexpensive to do so and it will wipe out Mason Malmuth's judgment.

    Malmuth will get nothing, nada, zippo. He will be left with @$34,000 (much more with appeals) in lawyer fees and the knowledge that he is a laughingstock in the poker community.

    Mason Malmuth can't win.

    However, if you've ever read his books, you know the guy is smart. So why would Mason Malmuth waste so much time and so much money over a trivial dispute he knows he can't win?

    Perhaps it's because the guy is just a certifiable first class asshole.



    Another strong call by Chuck. Mason reports Dutch made $60k payment and issues public apology letter.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-16-2012, 04:20 PM
  2. World Poker Tour Signs Joe Sebok
    By BuSTMeANuT in forum Flying Stupidity
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 07-22-2012, 01:47 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-08-2012, 01:36 AM
  4. 2+2 wins legal battle vs Dutch Boyd
    By JoyMillersMeatCurtains in forum Scams, Scandals, and Shadiness
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-06-2012, 08:21 PM
  5. Pokerspot and Dutch Boyd
    By BetCheckBet in forum Scams, Scandals, and Shadiness
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-03-2012, 09:09 PM