Can a State Seize an Internet Gambling Website's Domain Name? An Analysis of the Kentucky Case
UNLV Gaming Law Journal, Vol. 2, p. 107, Spring 2011
UNLV William S. Boyd School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper
26 Pages Posted: 14 Oct 2012
Date Written: June 13, 2011
Abstract
The recently developed Internet gambling forum has produced myriad legal issues affecting state, federal, and international law, which issues arise in large part from the ubiquity of the Internet. Based on an analysis of the Kentucky Case, this article argues that a state cannot seize an Internet gambling website’s domain name for violating that state’s laws. Specifically with respect to the Kentucky Case, Kentucky does not have personal jurisdiction over the gambling domain names’ registrars to have authority to seize them. Moreover, Kentucky’s gambling statute violates the Commerce Clause. Part II provides background to and the facts underlying the Kentucky Case and its procedural posture at the time the article was published. Part III discusses legislation — both federal legislation and Kentucky’s statute — affecting Internet gambling. Part IV addresses the critical jurisdictional and constitutional issues that arise when a state attempts to seize domain names. Finally, Part V argues that a state cannot seize an Internet gambling website’s domain name for violating a state law.
Keywords: Internet, gambling, online, poker, domain name, personal jurisdiction, commerce clause, Kentucky
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation