Posts Tagged ‘poker business’

First Test in the Post-FTP/Stars Era: NHUPC

by , Apr 17, 2011 | 12:12 am

The first visible indicator that we will be able to see after Friday’s indictments might be coming up in just a few hours. The National Heads-Up Poker Championship is the first new show to air in this new online-pokerless environment in the United States, with its debut episode set to air at 12p ET on NBC.

Could be interesting to see what the advertisements during the broadcast are. If the network’s a bit slow in reacting it might be one of the last times we ever see a FullTilt or PokerStars advertisements on American airwaves. With the exception of a few WPT episodes in production or already in the can, it will almost certainly be one of the last times we see so many patches from the companies involved in Friday’s indictments on players.

The most troubling possibility is that it would not air at all. Sound ridiculous? Consider the following: Kevmath had a retweet late Saturday night in which @buckwild33 noted that a scheduled WSOP Main Event 2007 marathon was not airing and boxing was shown in its place.

While it would certainly be a stretch to try and correlate this change in broadcast schedule on ESPN in some way with the upcoming NHUPC broadcaston NBC, it certainly should not be dismissed outright. There will be several small milestones that come up periodically in the coming days, weeks, and months, and we who are most affected might want to pay attention to their outcomes.

The information that we may be able to get from these indicators could provide a significant portion of the information that comes our way as things progress. Both the sites and the DOJ are likely headed for a process that is going to go very slowly, and information will trickle out slowly.

Again, this is just the direction that my thought process brought me in, and I don’t claim to have any information that is unavailable to everyone else. I think the NHUPC is at least an interesting talking point and the first small event in a series of events that will eventually have effects on millions of people around the world. Now is the time to keep your eyes open.

On a side note, it’s interesting to see how the title sponsor of the NHUPC, GoDaddy, could be the least toxic element at this point in time. Who would have thought two weeks ago that Godaddy’s CEO’s elephant hunting fiasco would become old news so quickly.


Zynga Acquires PokerTableRatings Team

Controversial dataminers to help “enhance” social poker experience, security

by , Apr 5, 2011 | 3:47 pm

Zynga should soon be well aware of my sick rungood in their $5/$10 “cash” games.

Continuing its rollout as serious new kid on the online poker block that is simply too big to be ignored … Zynga has acquired Poker Table Ratings, a Texas-based web-op that challenges current online poker Terms of Service with what technology and a legally enforceable free flow of information allow them to do.

PTR has also proved a key player in issues of online poker security for what their database can reveal not just about individual players, but site trends overall. According to Zynga:

The team’s experience and deep knowledge of the online poker industry will be invaluable as we work together to build out cutting-edge features and further enhance Zynga Poker.

However, Zynga goes on to specify that this acquisition of PTR parent company, MarketZero, a 16-person company in Austin, is not about taking over PTR, but rather about hiring their talent, who apparently will still own and operate MarketZero’s main website, PokerTableRatings.com.

Zynga has been on a hiring and acquisition spree of late — 11 acquisitions in the past 11 months — having obtained massive financing for expansion in the social media and gaming sectors, with estimates ranging from $180 million to $500 million.

Meanwhile, in presumably unrelated political news that may well someday be very related … a California state senator unveiled a “Do Not Track” bill yesterday — which would require all internet companies doing business in that state to allow users to opt out of any tracking or datamining capabilities.


OP-ED: ZyngaPoker Pro or Con

Assessing the impact of a Facebook game’s arrival in Las Vegas

by , Mar 27, 2011 | 5:19 pm

Jon Katkin


The Poker Economy


A lot of things have changed in the poker world since the Zynga PokerCon ended here in Las Vegas last Saturday. Partnerships have been approved (Caesars/888), announced (PokerStars/Wynn) and speculated upon (Full Tilt/Station Casinos). Legislation surrounding the legalization of online poker has been introduced and debated in various jurisdictions around the country and, I’m pretty sure that Erik Seidel won another high-stakes tournament somewhere in the world.

In short, it’s been a pretty busy week. And yet, with everything going on – or perhaps, because of it – I still find myself puzzling over Zynga’s potential role as a player in the post-regulation poker economy.

For those of you still unfamiliar with Zynga, they bill themselves as the largest online poker room in the world with a database of approximately 38 million players who compete for chips and tokens that have value only within the confines of Zynga’s proprietary system. In other words, Zynga is a play money site in the truest definition of the word. And yet, they came to Las Vegas last weekend to hold a live event for their fans and players.

Zynga has something every major real money site is looking for: players who have yet to make an initial deposit online. Would Zynga really stay out of real money gaming if someone came along with a partnership offer they couldn’t refuse? I don’t think so.

Populated by attendees who either won or bought their way into the event through Zynga’s site, the two-day conference was an interesting mix of Zynga players and industry insiders who were looking for information on this most mysterious of potential competitors or, perhaps, partners. I can’t speak for anyone else at the conference, but I have to admit that I walked away from the event with no clear answers.

As a fan event, I have to say the PokerCon was a success. For the cost of a $125 entry, Zynga’s players received professional instruction from Annie Duke and a plethora of other name pros, the chance to meet legends like Doyle Brunson and Mike Sexton, free food and drink at a Zynga-sponsored party, and a seat in a $100K tournament with a guaranteed payout of $26,000 to the winner. Not a bad deal, if you ask me.

As a “coming out party” for Zynga Poker, however, I can’t say I was as impressed.

More…


The Second Coming of PartyPoker?

Sexton welcomes new Zynga players; Hellmuth shares his poker-brat services

by , | 2:26 pm

mike sexton zynga pokercon partypoker wpt

Sexton: Ever-gracious ambassador.

I’m pretty sure you’re gonna be hearing about Zynga for awhile … not just because I still have lots of pictures and audio to unload from Zynga’s inaugural PokerCon at the Palms last weekend … but because, imho, as plenty of industry stalwarts seemed to recognize, this company that didn’t even exist in 2006 (that oh-so-glorious year of Jamie-Gold-boom-and-UIGEA-bust) has something that every other big-idea “revolutionary” poker undertaking has lacked since, well, PartyPoker.

Have a listen to Hall-of-Famer Mike Sexton, invited to simply share his brand of poker lore while mingling with Zynga players, give his quick take on the relevance of this relatively small little event and the booming company behind it:

Mike Sexton at Zynga Pokercon 2011
[audio:https://pokerati.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/zynga-sexton.mp3|titles=zynga-sexton]

Hellmuth: Party crasher?

Phil Hellmuth musta seen something more than just a $100k freeroll going on, too. Whether delivering a “bonus” to Pokercon attendees out of the kindness of his heart or just because his feelings were hurt for not being asked to take part in Zynga festivities, the “poker brat” slipped in as an uninvited (but presumably still welcome?) guest and revealed his presence at the Pokercon final table to a smattering of gasps and boos. When poker’s self-proclaimed badboy tried to educate the fans that they were supposed to boo him, the nice Zynga people didn’t exactly oblige — giving him instead a polite round of applause. You can tell, however, at least a few in the crowd understood the subtext of his unscripted exchange with host Ali Nejad — effectively trying to put PokerStars back in its (2nd) place.

Phil Hellmuth at Zynga Pokercon 2011
[audio:https://pokerati.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/zynga-hellmuth.mp3|titles=zynga-hellmuth]


Lo and Behold’em

Meet the Zynga Poker Boss

by , Mar 19, 2011 | 7:19 pm


Laurence Toney didn’t make the Bluff Power 20 even though he runs the largest online poker site in the world. (38 million active players, they say, 7.5 million a day!) I know I know … I didn’t vote for him either … but spoiler alert: probably will next year.

Lo, as he’s known, Zynga Poker’s General Manager, aka @lo_toney, is quite the new mystery man in poker. He doesn’t come from a poker background, he comes from YoVille … one of the original Zynga games (and before that art.com, and before that eBay-Collectibles). While YoVille in and of itself is rather fascinating — seriously, they actually have a YoVille media, and do real-life biz with companies the WSOP could only dream about some day seeing on its felts — what that understanding of true social gaming brings to poker remains to be seen.

Check out the RawVegas interview with Lo …

Watch Zynga PokerCon at the Palms with Lo Toney on RawVegas.tv

… via Wicked Chops


Darvin Moon Signed

Sponsor-resistant November Niner selling out to Heartland Poker Tour?

by , Mar 9, 2011 | 8:11 pm

Darvin Moon stood out among the ’09 November Nine not for the play that got him 2nd place (and $5.2 million) … but because he stood alone. The logger who had never been on a “big airplane” before the WSOP refused to accept upwards of a half million dollars to simply wear a patch for the likes of Full Tilt, PokerStars, or anyone else … because, basically he didn’t wanna be anyone’s bitch. (I’m paraphrasing, of course.)

But soon to be announced and official, the hapless poker multimillionaire from western Maryland has apparently caved — signing a deal with the Heartland Poker Tour to serve as their “ambassador” and wear HPT gear in all tourneys, including the WSOP.

This comes from a plenty reliable source; however, said source would not confirm (nor deny!) that Darvin Moon is near-broke and thus rethinking his aversion to wearing poker-related patches … but did confirm that no poker agents were involved in signing the agreement.

Moon, of course, was the unsignable runner-up at the 2009 WSOP … making him pretty much the opposite of Dennis Phillips, and the only November Niner ever not to be patched up at the main event final table. He also snubbed the WSOP this past November by turning down repeated invitations to be part of 2010 November Nine festivities in Las Vegas, opting instead to play a $1k HPT event at the Meskwaki Casino Bingo Hotel in Tama, Iowa.

One of my favorite fights with Katkin is on the value of Darvin Moon as a sponsored player. I dig the dude as a character … and consider him good for … nay, great extra=solid for poker — while Katkin (clearly stuck in his ’06-’07ish glory-days poker-world mindset) I think believes his donk play and non-pro, non-online nature make him the wrong guy for the WSOP to celebrate in their commercials. To which I say … hater.


CBS to Partner with New Jeffrey Pollack Pro Poker League?

by , Feb 23, 2011 | 12:00 am

We love a good rumor here at Pokerati, especially when someone else publishes it first so we don’t have to take a “hit” if a few little tibbits turn out to be less than 100 percent accurate. (Still stinging from the two we “goofed” on in 2010 — Harrah’s was looking to sell the Rio and Harry Reid working on a poker-only bill; so far only one of those has proven to be true, despite public denials from people directly involved.)

Anyhow, “facts” shmacts … Variety is reporting that Jeffrey Pollack’s new Federated poker league may have found itself a TV partner in CBS — as in the venerable broadcast network.


Who Owns Your Poker? (Part I)

Why It’s Important to Protect Your Intellectual Property

by , Jan 31, 2011 | 7:10 am

I have a friend in the poker industry. He’s a fantastic player, very smart, and a successful entrepreneur. On top of it, he’s a great guy. He has started up, managed, and hosted several top-rated poker television shows. He’s no slouch; he knows his stuff.

A few months ago, he called me up and wanted to talk about moving his (then-current) show to a new venue, broadcast medium, and sponsor. Specifically, he wanted to know if he could take the name of his show with him to his new broadcast home. For purposes of the discussion, let’s call the show “Big Slick.” Was Big Slick his property?

Truthfully, but unhelpfully, I told him: “It depends.” To try to start to figure it out, I asked him a number of questions about Big Slick. (I was a fan of the show, but didn’t know how the name came about. I also hadn’t been his attorney when he started it, so I didn’t know how the show itself began and developed.)

Not all of the questions and the follow-ups are here, but below are a few of the initial and critical ones if you have intellectual property that you want to protect and carry with you through your poker career. Poker players and personalities know the value of branding, personalities, and trade names. Often, they just need to make better up-front efforts to safeguard that value.

1. What does the agreement say?

What did the written agreement between my guy and his promoter/broadcaster say? It turns out it didn’t say anything; there was no written agreement. Not having a written agreement doesn’t necessarily mean there’s no contract between the parties. Some important contracts can be verbal. But some laws specifically prohibit verbal contracts (for example, many jurisdictions prohibit verbal real estate contracts selling real estate has to be done by written agreement). More important, verbal contracts are invariably tougher to enforce than written contracts. Their terms often aren’t clear and, even when they are, there’s often a disagreement about whether the parties agreed to commit themselves to a contract, as such. A clearly drafted and properly executed written agreement solves both of these problems.

Anyway, back to my pal. When he and the promoter decided to collaborate, it was agreed that an advertising sponsor would pay a certain amount to broadcast the show (this wasn’t committed to writing, either). My friend hosted and produced the show. He came up with the name Big Slick and owned the corresponding web domain name. Some help was provided gratis by the promoter in putting together the Big Slick logo for the show. There was no term on the agreement between my friend and the promoter.

2. Who had trademark rights in Big Slick?

While I was on the phone with my friend, I did a quick search of the trademarks databases in the US Patent and Trademark Office and the Canadian Intellectual Property Office. Neither showed a registration for the Big Slick trademark. (Remember that Big Slick is a pseudonym; you’ll have to take my word that the real mark was and is not descriptive and otherwise fully registrable.) Which meant that neither my guy nor his promoter had a registered trademark in the name.

What about common law trademark rights? Common law trademark rights are rights obtained through use of a non-registered mark. To the extent that there is a paramount issue in trademarks, it’s this notion of use, and not just use in any manner, but use as a trademark. Both my buddy and the broadcaster had been promoting the name through marketing for the show. However, had they been using Big Slick as a trademark? The promoter had listed Big Slick on its website as a member of a family of shows that it broadcast and promoted. This wasn’t use as a trademark; this was arguably an indication that it had a licence from the trademark owner to call attention to the fact that it broadcast the show. My friend’s usage was much more consistent and compelling. He used Big Slick as a brand and a trademark. His website or service wasn’t just broadcasting Big Slick; his show was The Big Slick.

While my friend came up with the name, the logo was a collaboration. This highlights the difference between word marks and design marks. Word marks are trademarks that are bare words in any font, style, or size. “PartyPoker” is trademarked as a word mark around the world (confined to the wares and services set out in the particular mark) however it is written or it appears. Design marks are trademarked logos or words written in a specific font or style (or both); “PartyPoker” in the stylized lettering with which we’re all familiar is also trademarked as a design mark in several jurisdictions.

There was no registered design mark for Big Slick. My friend indicated that both he and his promoter had worked on it “together” and that both had used it in marketing the show. A key question here (for copyright purposes) was “who actually put pen to paper and designed the logo?” Often, there’s one person that did it, and here it was my guy. My buddy should have had the copyright and the better set of trademark rights because the logo had been used by him as a trademark.

3. Other Issues

As briefly mentioned above, copyright also came into our discussion, but this post is already getting long enough without drilling down into that. I asked my friend whether Big Slick had any value separate and apart from his involvement. That is, if he left and the promoter still had a show called Big Slick, what would it be worth, either as a show or as a bare name or design mark containing Big Slick? Setting aside the IP aspects of who owns what, there was a practical question of whether the parties were about to start fighting over something that might not be worth a fight.

At the end of the day, the promoter suggested that it had some rights in Big Slick and would need to have those rights bought out. I disagreed, based fundamentally on my guy’s use of the word and design marks as trademarks (see above). My friend – ever the serial entrepreneur – decided to create a whole new name and go forward with his new promoter. I told him that he still had considerable rights in Big Slick and that simply walking away wasn’t his only option, but I respected his decision. (A potential public fight about the name between the parties wasn’t without risk for either of them.)

The bottom line, of course, is that the parties are always well-advised to turn their minds to these questions when they’re establishing their relationship so that there’s little room for argument later on. My friend went with a new promoter on a new site, but this time we insisted on a written agreement. (A written contract doesn’t have to be anyone’s magnum opus or cost an arm and a leg. My friend’s agreement was three pages and my review took a few minutes.) In it, I specified that my friend was to retain all intellectual property rights in his new show, inclusive of the name and all trademarks. The promoter would have an unlimited and non-exclusive right to broadcast and host the show on its website. Both parties are happy with the arrangement.

My friend also owns the new associated Internet domain name and is considering a trademark application.

The moral of the story is: write it down in advance and think the issues through so that, when poker-related property that has been developed is valuable and people are parting ways, there’s less to fight about and fewer fees wasted on lawyers. As another like-minded lawyer friend of mine puts it: Tough contractual negotiations are always easier than tough settlement negotiations.

(Thanks to Michael Hilliard (my best friend, an eminent IP lawyer, and counsel to Microsoft) and to Jamie Bashtanyk (@TCTrademarks on Twitter and my go-to trademark agent), for correcting this blog post for me. However, any errors in this post are mine alone.)

Toronto-based Stu Hoegner writes a darn good disclaimer as a gaming attorney and legal advisor. You can follow him on Twitter @GamingCounsel.


Too Many Tourneys

PCA, Aussie Millions, LAPC … all before February; where do we go from here?

by , Jan 24, 2011 | 6:17 pm

Jon Katkin


OP-ED

We’re a month into 2011 and already, the poker season has revved itself into high gear. Since January 1, we’ve seen major multi-tournament events in the Bahamas, Melbourne, and now LA. If that’s not enough poker for you, then head to Vegas where you can play in a couple of smaller, but still notable, tournament series; the Caesars Winter Classic (running now) and Venetian’s venerable Deep Stack series, starting on the 28th.

And while I’m as big a fan of a good tournament – or tournament series – as the next guy, I have to ask has poker gone too far?

For a moment, let’s forget about all the money it would cost an average player to follow the circuit around the world and just look at sheer number of events that a tourney player has to choose from. I mean, if you want to become a professional hobo, there are probably worse ways to see the world than by joining the poker circus. Los Angeles, Vegas, Atlantic City, Biloxi, Paradise Island, Prague, Sao Paulo, Melbourne, London…. The world’s your oyster if you can pay the freight and handle the jet lag and inevitable food poisoning you’ll pick up somewhere along the way.

There’s too much poker to be played in too many places. All of these tournament options are slowly cannibalizing each other by stretching the player base – and the players’ bankrolls – too thin.

The fact is, there’s barely a week left on the calendar where there’s not some kind of tournament begging to be played. Even if you just confine yourself to the continental US, you can easily go months without ever sleeping in your own bed or seeing the family you used to have. Decide to play internationally and you could easily find yourself classified as a missing person unless you can regularly Skype with your loved ones to prove that you’re still alive.

More…


Jeffrey Pollack, Annie Duke Launching New Poker League

by , Jan 18, 2011 | 9:52 am

Former WSOP Commissioner Jeffrey Pollack, who oversaw the WSOP through the boomtime poker era, plans to make professional poker something more akin to the PGA.

He’s founded a new California company — Federated Sports+Gaming — with Annie Duke on the executive team and serving as commissioner of the poker league, which promises to be a professionals-only set-up. Duke resigned from the WSOP’s event-steering Players Advisory Committee two months ago and last month renounced her relationship with UB, the most notoriously beleaguered online poker site in history.

According to @OskarGarcia from the Associated Press:

The yet-to-be-named league is planning four televised regular-season events plus a $1 million championship freeroll at the Palms Casino Resort in Las Vegas this year, league executives said.

“This is incredibly pro-centric,” Duke told The Associated Press. “This is the one piece that’s kind of missing from the poker landscape right now, which is something for the best players in the world to compete against the best players in the world.”

Should be interesting to see who, by Federated’ new definition, qualify as pros … with one obvious litmus test being will @donkeybomber be able to secure his card?

Corporately, Duke is an executive vice president of Federated Sports+Gaming’s, though not a member of its board of directors. The others on Pollack’s team come from YouBet.com, the biggest legal online gaming company based in the US, which was recently acquired by Churchill Downs, the publicly traded online gaming outpost for Kentucky’s horse-race industry. Others on Pollack’s executive team share varying degrees from Northwestern University, to which I say, um … Go Cats!

Pollack, serving as chairman of Federated, maintains his position as executive chairman of PBR, which real cowboys will tell you is very different from traditional “rodeo”. Read below for his full statement announcing his reburstage onto the poker scene:

More…


WSOP Plants Its Flag in Italy

Forms “Alliance” with Microgame, People’s Poker

by , Dec 17, 2010 | 4:18 pm

Since it seems the Feds aren’t gonna allow the world to come to the WSOP (via the internet) … the WSOP is now taking steps elsewhere across the world. Caesars Interactive Entertainment, formerly HIE but still parent company to the WSOP, announced Italian partnerships that will allow the Montreal-based company (with operational headquarters in Las Vegas) to establish its presence live and online in the regulated Italian market — and ultimately make it easier for these poker paisanos to get to Vegas in the summer.

Read below for official details:

More…


The Politics Game (as per Poker)

Perspective from Howard Lederer, political donkeys

by , Dec 11, 2010 | 12:27 pm

I’m surprised to see poker people still speculating on the #ReidBill’s chances for bringing the poker industry a Christmas present or leaving us a lump of coal … as if any of us could be more than donkeys in a game where that word alone means something totally different.

The guys at Wicked Chops are saying “two outer” as if they have the same level of expertise as Pokerati. Dudes, we’ve done more than just take a tour of the White House … we ponied up the extra $9 for an audio guide!

(OK, you’re right, I can’t prove that … but if I had a receipt it would be an easier tax deduction for us than you! And true fact: I did ride paddle boats outside the Jefferson Memorial more times during the Carter administration than I saw Star Wars at a drive-in, so …)

Though just semi-experienced at best, I have been down this special-interest road before … where you’ve got a bill on the table but are running up against a semi-arbitrary not-clearly defined session clock — go Texas poker ’09! Which is why Pokerati is setting its line for #Reidbill passage firmly at somewhere between 8 and 88 percent.

Book it. We should know for sure by Tuesday or Monday or Wednesday-ish.

Though no one in the so-called “poker industry” has much if any political experience prior to Harry Reid’s current term … some poker-biz donkey-pols have learned a thing or two along the way to get us here. For a little perspective, here’s “the Professor” Howard Lederer learnin’ us some Political Science 101 last year at a high-society charity tourney in Washington DC, providing an overview of the game at hand … particularly for small-time players hoping to satellite into a bigger Beltway event:


Poker Partyline

Update from Pappas, the PPA, et Al D’Amato

by , Dec 6, 2010 | 5:38 pm

Was just writing a post highlighting a few places to bookmark for the week, including:

Everyone seems to be on pins and needles waiting to hear something … when along comes word over the transom from our good-good friends at the PPA, giving the update on where things stand in the halls of a lame-duck Congress as per online poker.

In a nutshell: We’ve been working toward this for five years. Don’t let Harrah’s take all the credit. Hang tight. We’re Blackberrying our asses off trying to get this thing right. Stay tuned, quit yer bitchin’, things change. And, of course, don’t forget to spend whatever political capital you may have telling your Congresspeeps why online poker regulation is the most awesomest thing since America and freedom!

Meanwhile, I set up a specific Pokerati tag for “UIGEA Repeal” so you could follow the most timely best from all Pokerati’s well-informed contributors as they posted … but alas, have since discovered a rather key error in that, technically, this unofficial Harry Reid Poker Bill wouldn’t repeal the UIGEA, but rather would strengthen it … still hopefully to the poker world’s liking, obv.

UPDATE: Indeed, Al D’Amato and the PPA are calling on YOU to contact your US senators. Assuming you believe in the overall cause of guaranteeing American freedom and much needed tax revenue via proper regulation of online poker, as espoused by D’Amato in the email blast titled “Tell your Senators to Support iPoker Regulation TODAY!” … click here to give online-poker proponents some numbers to bargain with when negotiating with other special interests.

More…


Final Table Patch Power

From Full Tilt to CardRunners to Full Tilt

by , Nov 10, 2010 | 10:36 pm

Our extra-good friends at CardRunners had quite the score this November Nine … patching up a full third of the field in play — chip-positions 4, 5, and 6, fwiw. The top online poker training site stepped in to fill the patch void left by Full Tilt’s November Nine over-dominance banking some big branding time on last night’s ESPN final-table broadcast.

Matt Jarvis, Fillipo Candio, and John Racener were CR’s table reps — though Racener did switch to Full Tilt-branded gear for heads-up play. No surprise that his original primary patch sponsor would want back in as rules permitted, but it is somewhat unusual (perhaps even unprecedented?) to see ESPN production crews relent to online poker patch-interests over matters of television continuity in a single episode.


The original CardRunners Three

photo: Rob Gracie / Greasie Wheels

But sure enough, with Racener surviving to be the last CardRunner standing, something looked different to TV viewers once they got down to heads-up. Maybe just big money on the table?

Also interesting to note: Full Tilt has produced and/or patched up only one WSOP main event champion — Jerry Yang.

Just a matter of variance?


WPT/Party Continues to Rip off WSOP on Facebook

How much do ad agencies charge for shoddy, shady campaigns anyway?

by , Oct 20, 2010 | 2:03 pm

I swear I’m not the Facebook police any more than I am a Harrah’s attorney … but when the shit just gets served up while I’m busy liking stuff … it’s kinda hard to miss! Yet another example appeared on Tuesday night of a rather blatant misappropriation of WSOP trademark on Facebook. It always seems to happen on Tuesday nights … hmmm.

First, before I get into the new offense … to be fair and clear, the WPT did acknowledge their error almost immediately after we mocked their maiden foray into Facebook marketing. On September 21 a WPT spokesman said:

“We would like to confirm that the Facebook ad mentioned in your September 17, 2010 post was indeed a mistake on the part of a 3rd party advertising agency used by our “WPT Texas Hold’em on Facebook” licensee. The ad was placed by the advertising agency without the knowledge of WPT or our Facebook game licensee.

Please be assured that we acted immediately to rectify the situation and that the advertising agency has pulled the unapproved ad. Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention.”

Cool, yeah whatever, like we said, we’re not the Facebook police, but you’re welcome — Pokerati is always happy to help. We did notice the replacement ads that appeared the following Tuesday:

More…