Bodog Poker Founder Not in Contempt of Court in Bitter Domain Litigation Case

In the $49 million default judgment issued against Bodog, under which its BodogPoker and other domain names were placed under the control of 1st Technologies, the bitter ongoing case took a turn in Bodog's favor when a federal magistrate in Las Vegas ruled that because neither Bodog nor founder Calvin Ayre are residents of Nevada they are not subject to Nevada law, so Ayre is not required to appear before the court and thus cannot be found guilty of contempt of court.

So the attempt by 1st Technologies to get Bodog founder Calvin Ayre into a Nevada courtroom, which could have possibly placed the high profile online gambling executive under personal danger, has seemingly failed.

In a ruling issued on 28 November, the magistrate denied a motion of contempt on the part of 1st Technology (who Ayre's blog dubbed the 'patent troll'), which is the same company that won a ruling in Washington state causing Bodog to lose its domain names.

Ayre said, "This has been an interesting case, and as it progresses, there seems to be plenty of compelling facts emerging. With the recent ruling in favor of the defense, I'm happy that it was also clarified by the judge that I am, by law, not personally in contempt of any order from the Nevada court."

Another and potentially more important issue is the request for clarification by the courts whether domain names are property that can be subject to seizure to satisfy a judgment, which was launched by the Bodog legal team .

Bodog stresses that the outcome of the Washington clarification request could greatly affect the interests of international domain owners registered in Washington state, where there are several very prominent domain name registrars.

If the court answers that Washington domain names ARE seizeable property, it could undermine the business viability of Washington State domain registrars, since prominent domain name owners may opt to move their businesses to other states with more favorable legal structures or to jurisdictions that more strongly protect domain names, such as the European Union.