Federal Court Awards TM Holder Of “Two Plus Two” $60K and The Domain Name Twoplustwo.com From Dutch” Boyd

According to a story today in Parttimepoker.coma federal court has awarded the Trademark Holder of the term Two Plus Two, $25,000 in statutory damages and $33,985.45 in attorney’s fees against poker player Dutch Boyd who registered the domain name Twoplustwopoker.com.

The owner of the trademark, Two Plus Two Publishing filed a lawsuit over the domain Twoplustwopoker.com  on December 9, 2009 against poker legend Dutch Boyd on was got the domain name on July 14, 2004.

Two Plus Two Publishing alleged that the domain was confusingly similar to their well known trademark Two Plus Two and their website Twoplustwo.com.

“In the partial summary judgment, signed March 1, 2012 by U.S. District Judge Kent J. Johnson, Two Plus Two Publishing LLC was awarded $25,000 in statutory damages and $33,985.45 in attorney’s fees.”

The domain name   Twoplustwopoker.com is now shown in the whois records as being owned by Two Plus Two Publishing

Comments

  1. Anon says

    Damn, Dutch. Mason finally took that scalp, eh?

    I remember when this broke on 2 + 2. If I recall, Dutch said the site never made more than a few bucks… yet man oh man, what a recovery!

    Squatters beware… You F with the wrong people, there will be no “BUT I OFFERED TO GIVE THEM THE DOMAIN FOR FREE!!!” bojangles dance after the fact. Some TM holders are just our for the blood of whatever little boogers who piss on their brand.

    See ya next year at WSOP home.

  2. BrianWick says

    Two Plus Two had common law as well as registered TM’s/SM’s going back to 1990 – so this – apparantly famous “gambling” guy – registering a TM domain with a “gambling” term following it paints a pretty bad picture.

  3. Alan says

    The article states:
    “After unsuccessful attempts to receive the domain from Boyd, Two Plus Two Publishing filed a lawsuit against Boyd on December 9, 2009.”

    What a dope!
    He could have handed over the domain and walked away.

  4. Uzoma says

    This is a great story! Thank you, Mr. Berkens.

    It is nice to have a great domain blog like this to read. This is much better than that stupid blog I used to read – the blogger over there was a hypocrite to max.

  5. Blame it on the computer. says

    Did he try to use the “A computer program registered the domain name automatically. Unfortunately, we cannot possibly keep track of every domain name the program registers. Mistakes happen. Please contact us when there’s a problem.” defense?

    A large number of people, possibly including some judges, will actually believe this is honest and a legitimate excuse. It’s always worth a try.

    Next time you are reading Google News, look at the page footer. There is a disclaimer, something along the lines of “The ordering of these results were determined by a computer…”

    What is the purpose of that disclaimer? Why would it matter of the ordering was determined by a human?

    It’s as if they are saying to anyone with a complaint: “It’s not us, it’s the algorithm. We’re so sorry.”

    (Never mind that cognizant people design algorithms. They test them and they understand the implications. Algorithms do not fall from the sky.)

  6. All In says

    Looks like Dutch went all in with a pair of dueces. Not usually a winning hand. Yet another strike against a guy who has a less than stellar reputation already. Believe he renegged on a couple of domain deals. Wonder if he reaches into the pot at WPT events to take his cash out when the cards don’t favor him. Guys like this are the reason they have cameras in casinos.

  7. One Eyed Sue says

    Brandi offed herself because she dwelt in the jaws of the beast that is ‘the public eye’ and couldn’t take the intense scrutiny and criticism that came with it. I’m convinced whoever Redtube’d the video of her giving a blowjob is what sent her over the edge. There is no hiding from what’s on the internet. She lived in such a way that the line between internet persona and real life became intensely blurred and none of it, on either side, was very flattering.

    Egomaniacs live on their personas.
    The entirety of their self worth is tied to what other people think of them. In women, it’s $3000 handbags. In men, $20,000 wristwatches. When her stock took a nosedive, when she was revealed as a grifter, a user, a whore, the poor girl couldn’t cope. Whatever role Sklansky played in that meltdown was negligible. He was just another dirtbag on the dirtbag express that is the LV Poker World.

    She had been manipulating her way through the that world for a couple years. She was awfully pretty, there’s no denying that. She exploited her looks. It backfired. She couldn’t cope. Poor girl, the end.

  8. says

    “Never mind that cognizant people design algorithms. They test them and they understand the implications. Algorithms do not fall from the sky.”

    Actually, algorithms are often designed by algorithms today. Just to keep things legally interesting, I’m sure.

Join the Discussion