Can't Gamble With Your Domain Names!

03/15/09

In October I reported on a rather unusual decision by a Kentucky Judge holding that domain names were "gambling devices" under Kentucky law. In the case, Kentucky v. 141 Internet Domain Names, Judge Wingate considered a request by the Commonwealth of Kentucky that he order in rem seizure of several domain names under a state statute allowing seizure of gambling devices. Judge Wingate granted the request, finding that the domain names (which led to on-line gambling websites) were gambling devices, and that the state had in rem jurisdiction over the names despite the fact that the defendants, registrars and registries were all located outside the state. He ordered the relevant registries (most of the registrars being located outside the United States) to turn control of the domain names over to the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

If you like to play poker online, you can now breath easy. On January 20, 2009, an appellate panel held in a four to one opinion that "it stretches credulity to conclude that" a domain name could be a gambling device under the state's statutory definition. Thus, the lower court lacked in rem jurisdiction over the domain names. Interactive Media Entertainment v. Wingate, 2009 WL 142995 (Ky App. 2009). One judge, more credulous that the others, disagreed, stating that the entire compilation of the gambler's computer, gambling site's computers, software and domain name constituted a gambling device and the court could exercise jurisdiction over just the domain name portion of the "device."
The conclusion was clear enough though. You can't gamble with your domain name.

[more]