On Monday, SuperLobby’s official Twitter feed posted a two-page letter the company received from DraftKings attorneys, ordering SuperLobby to immediately halt (a) all use of DraftKings’ trademarks on SuperLobby.com, and (b) all scraping of data from DraftKings site to compile SuperLobby’s weekly DFS statistics.
Following SuperLobby making the C&D letter public, speculation behind DraftKings’ motives have ranged from the overzealous application of DraftKings’ new no outside scripting policy to the company taking offense at SuperLobby having declared DraftKings’ archrival FanDuel as the DFS market leader last year.
The attack on SuperLobby isn’t winning DraftKings many fans, with online commenters accusing the company of everything from hypocrisy to vindictiveness. More than a few observers are wondering why, with all the resources the company is devoting to legally defending its business model, DraftKings chose to open a new legal front against a company that acts as one of DFS’ most vocal champions.
SuperLobby, which is based in the UK, has yet to indicate how it intends to respond, tweeting only that it had “moved to DEFCON 1” in response to the decree from “the superior overlords lawyers.” However, SuperLobby did say it continued to prepare its 2015 overview of NFL DFS activity, while cautioning that “needless to say, FanDuel comes out as the clear and undisputed #1.”
Unlike FanDuel, DraftKings has declined to provide SuperLobby with weekly stats on guaranteed player poll (GPP) and cash game entry fees, leaving SuperLobby to issue a weekly reminder to its readers that its DraftKings data didn’t include cash game fees.
DraftKings has been the recipient of two ‘cease and desist’ letters: one from New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman and the other from a Hawaii city prosecutor. Reflecting each market’s relative importance to its bottom line, DraftKings chose to legally fight the New York letter while complying with the Hawaii letter.