Press Release: 32Red continues push to assert IP rights

[Vladi]

Don't misconstrue my dislike of overly broad-reaching IP laws that are commonly abused these days with "hate" for 32 Red. I recommend 32 Red to players. I think 32 Vegas were and are run by a bunch of conmen, liars, and thieves.

It is laws that stifle innovation that I have a problem with.

[rak]

YEP..

I have to agree that sueing anyone that uses 32 or Red in url's is a bit over the edge but maybe they were doing a bit of black hat seo as well so they were called out... who knows.

I'm going to build a gambling website called "bonustreakaction" ... and marketed it all over the web, and compete for your terms....

Just messing with you - I wouldn't want to be the one to face the awesome power that is bonustreak!!!

[Vladi]

I reckon bonusstreakers.com would draw a bit of traffic...

[Mark@32Red]

Hi Vladi,

Again, this is my view, not that of 32Red!

Anyone with a modicum of intelligence would not confuse 32 Red with Spin32 for example.

I'm in a privileged position to have been able to see the evidence that was put forward in the case, and I am afraid this statement isn't correct. There were many players who were confused - often quoting incorrect account numbers etc etc. Hence the ruling in our favour.

A lot of 32Red players refer to us as simply "32" - you will no doubt have seen that our Desktop icon is also just "32" and there are many other examples. My personal opinion (and seemingly the opinion of the high court judge) is that there is no reason for a gaming company to use "32" except to form an association with 32Red.

On a final note, you mentioned in a previous post that this kind of action was a form of bullying. Again, this is my personal view, but if you look at the annual revenue of both 32Red Plc and WHG Intl Plc - you'll see that in a David vs Golliath battle - it was actually the underdogs who came out on top. It's a competetive industry as you know, and we all need to fight hard to protect our investments - the fact that Spin32 and 32Royal were much smaller than 32Vegas, doesnt mean that they should be treated any different IMO.

Regards,
Mark

[32x]

Hi Guys,

Firstly, I would like to point out that this is my personal option, and not an official 32Red response.

It’s an interesting debate going on here; it’s good to hear your thoughts on the latest domains that have been brought under 32Red’s control.

I’d like to put a question out there: as the number 32 has nothing special about it – other than it has been used by 32Red as part of it’s identity for 10 years now - why would any other gambling company choose to use it, if there were not looking to benefit from the hard work 32Red have put in building this brand? Why not use 21 or 13 which are accepted as “lucky” numbers and are not distinctive in this sense? It’s so open and shut that the owners of these infringing domains had to relinquish control. That speaks volumes IMHO.

I should also point out that when it comes to “32” – 32Red owns the trade mark for this term for ANY gambling related site in the UK. So as Dave suggests, 32Red wouldn’t be too concerned over 32shoes.com or 32hippos.co.uk, but any gambling related site using 32 would be infringing UK registered trade mark number 008398695.

Regards
Mark

* * * * The statements below are my opinions only, and are to the best of my recollection * * * *

What about my situation? I own 32x.com, which existed before 32red.com (5 years before). I purchased it in an auction, and my "intent" was not in "bad faith" as stated in the WH trial, to the best of my recollection and opinion. Also, in my opinion, there is no "consumer confusion", as per the WH case and Trade Mark Law, to the best of my recollection and opinion. The term 32x actually meant something before the internet existed; 32x CDROM, and 32x Sega (1994) (the majority of my traffic per Google analytics, Alexa, and my server logs). In my opinion, 32red was not a term that existed in any industry until it was created in 2001, but that is the best that I can recall and am not sure... If you type 32 on Google or Yahoo, I will not show up as to the best of my recollection. If you type 32x on Google or Yahoo, I am on the first page at least as of today...

The "intent", in my opinion, as well as the Trade Marks and The WH case "The UK mark: validity" definition. In my opinion, I don't fall into the definition nor am I a Casino. I don't provide Casino Services or take money directly from customers, in my opinion, per their Trade Marks.

Here are their Trade Marks to the best of my recollection:

UK Trade Mark: 2509861 "32"

EU Trade Mark: 8398695 "32"

EU Trade Mark: 2907426 "32red"

EU Trade Mark: 2814424 "32red"

US Trade Mark: 78,654,867 "32red"


I urge everyone to look-up these trade marks on the EU, UK, and US Trade Mark database and to download the William Hill case, (Public Record) to fully understand the actual definition. It takes a bit of time to reference the article numbers, but this is the only way to fully understand it; moreover, I also do not claim to fully understand it, as my statements are only my opinions.

I also wanted to state that CAP, Affiliate Guard Dog and GPWA's forum are located in the US, so stating that this is my opinion is my right under US law and the constitution. I was accused by their rep on GPWA, in my opinion and to my best recall, of making "an allegation". Opinion IS the key word here..

The reason I am responding here is because I feel, in my opinion, that I am being targeted and have done nothing. I am finding these posts all over the internet and, in my opinion, they are bullying as stated previously. I received a Cease and Desist, asking me to hand over my domain. I WILL NOT....


* * * * The statements above are my opinions only, and are to the best of my recollection * * * *

[32x]

* * * * The statements below are my opinions only, and are to the best of my recollection * * * *

I also wanted to state that CAP, Affiliate Guard Dog and GPWA's forum are located in the US, so stating that this is my opinion is my right under US law and the constitution.

* * * * The statements above are my opinions only, and are to the best of my recollection * * * *

I would like to make a correction! I thought Affiliate Guard Dog was in US, not true, but I DID state that it was my opinion... The whois information showed as Arizona US.. My mistake...

[Webzcas]

I also wanted to state that CAP, Affiliate Guard Dog and GPWA's forum are located in the US, so stating that this is my opinion is my right under US law and the constitution.

Not getting involved in this here as already made my own view clear on the GPWA.

Just wanted to state that Affiliate Guard Dog is not hosted in the US. It is physically hosted in London, England. Not that I am sure what that has anything to do with this issue you have.