Comments on: Chris Bosh: Internet Police

By: Managing An Athlete’ Online Brand: A 5-Step Getting Started Guide For Agents – SportsAgentBlog.com | Sports Agent News

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:01:45 +0000

[...] example: In California, a single cyber-squatter was recently convicted of registering the domain names of nearly 800 basketball players. Domain names are Web browser [...]

By: Darren Heitner

Darren Heitner — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 03:06:38 +0000

I would think that the service company has the potential to make a killing based on the power it was granted. Way more than the expected value of just having his own domain name. I just can’t comprehend why a judge would grant a player property that has no relation to his persona.

By: Jason Swango

Jason Swango — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 02:26:10 +0000

Here is what I think: The article said that the company was profiting from the site by, i believe, selling chris bosh the player items. He was awarded an award of XXX,XXX amount of dollars. As compensation, he was given their other properties, that so happenned to be other doamin names. I am not sure you cannot own the domain names as long as you do not use someone elses identity to profit from such – I think that is the reasoning – Chris, knowing he cannot profit from the sites, decides to give them to the owner (the persons whose domain they relate to) and is offering a service – to them – which, they are likely to use, which means he gets to rpofit legally from these web properties with his service company – that was what I believe happenned…just my thoughts

By: Ryan O'Keefe

Ryan O'Keefe — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:58:31 +0000

I think the heart of the issue here is whether or not a domain name is protected as part of an athlete’s name and likeness. We have seen athletes pursue legal action when their likeness was used in video games without their consent, does the same idea apply to a url?

What I found to be maybe even more interesting in this case, which is what Darren was originally getting at I believe, is why Bosh would be entrusted with the other names in addition to his when it clearly it is the intention of his organization to profit, albeit indirectly, off of the other domain names. Hadi Teherany is the co-founder of Bosh’s internet marketing company Max Deal Technologies and has been handed a list of over 800 potential clients. Being that the whole purpose of this case was to prevent profiting off of someone else’s name, it seems a bit hypocritical.

By: Jason Swango

Jason Swango — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 04:14:49 +0000

Darren,

If you read my post again, you will see that my example goes beyond just having the same name – I mentioned that Bosh 1 makes money on his site from selling apparel – which to me seemed to be the point of the decision – he was using the site, in your original article, and was making money selling Bosh materials –

I do agree that I do not feel that URLs should be IP if it is a non-trademarked name and furthermore belive that the whole term (ie. http://www.whateverdomain.com/.net/.org) should need to be trademarked – maybe someone could keep anothers name as domain if this happens – not an IP lawyer but I will look into it and repost

I appreciate your site and we should talk sometime -

Jason

By: Darren Heitner

Darren Heitner — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 03:15:48 +0000

This is what I mean by this lawsuit allowing too much leeway: http://twitter.com/hadisworld/status/4904854812

And so it begins.

By: Darren Heitner

Darren Heitner — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:23:14 +0000

I think that if your name was Chris Bosh and you purchased that name, you would be fine. I cannot see a court taking that domain name from you just because there is another Chris Bosh who is a public figure and much more popular that you are. If that was the case here and the owner had the same name as one of the domains, I don’t think he would have had to give that particular one back.

You raise some great points, and I am torn on the situation, myself. Should the government really get involved in this type of matter? Do public figures have the rights to their names in a url? Is it a part of their persona?

By: Jason Swango

Jason Swango — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 01:19:35 +0000

I take issue with the decision as a whole. I like to think of the companies venture as genius – I mean, afterall, we are a capitalist society and buying a domain name with the rights to sell it seems perfectly fine. Afterall, i own many domain names. I think that there can be clever marketing opportunities by buying domain names of other players, of which could help generate business (I wont divulge much more of this here). I take issue with that fact. In todays world, parents and others should take control fo their right to the opportunity to purchase these domains for future use – afterall, what if your name was chris bosh and you purchased that name – Bosh 1 is a plumber Bosh 2 is a star NBA player…Bosh 1 profits from selling NBA material because of the site – who wins? O- the attorneys – my bad! Bad decision!

By: Darren Heitner

Darren Heitner — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:15:08 +0000

Not to mention that the whole story would be turned to completely destroy Bosh’s image. My concern isn’t about the players getting the rights to their domain names, it is that with this new power designated to Bosh, he can use his position to help out his other businesses that have absolutely nothing to do with the lawsuit. The ruling is too broad for my liking.

By: Jorge

Jorge — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:09:35 +0000

@Darrent: Just speculating, but hopefully the judge warned him that he’d check up on it, and hold him in contempt if he tried any shennanigans.