If you’re paying attention to the Canadian gaming scene, you’re aware that the Manitoba Court of King’s Bench granted an injunction prohibiting Bodog (operated by Il Nido Inc.) from offering or advertising online gambling services to Manitoba residents.
If you haven’t, here are two articles by my go-to sources for Canadian Gaming News:
Tom Nightengale – Manitoba Court Grants Lottery Injunction Against Bodog
Geoff Zochodne – Offshore Sportsbook Bodog Hit With Manitoba Court Injunction
I’m a bit surprised that, other than articles reporting on the facts of the case, I haven’t found any opinion pieces or analysis of what the decision means for those active in online gambling in the rest of Canada. We sent out a client bulletin providing our perspective on what this means for operators, suppliers, affiliates, and media partners in Canada, and I suspect that other lawyers did as well.
.net Them Eat Cake
On LinkedIn, Ron Segev wrote: We haven’t quite seen this before. Canadian judge orders offshore gambling site Bodog to cease operations. Specific reference is made to .Net advertising. If you’re offshore, take notice!
And I agree with Ron 100% (almost – we disagree on whether the “n” of .net should be capitalized). Specific reference made to .net advertising is one of the notable aspects of this decision. .net advertising (ok that looks weird – should I capitalize the “n”?) has an acrimonious past, with those opposed to .net adamant that it doesn’t pass the smell test as a separate activity, distinct from .com. On the other hand, those benefiting from .net rely on the legal position that as long as there is no real-money gaming on the .net site, no links or pop-ups to real money gaming on the .net site, and no one providing personal information on the .net site is contacted by the real-money gaming site, the site is not unlawful and may be advertised.
To me, the fascinating part of .net style advertising in 2025 is the broader issue of convergence of gaming and non-gaming brands (think Fanatics, ESPNBet), and how the master brand cross-promotes the gaming and non-gaming elements.
Back to the Injunction
There are other interesting elements of the case, and I’m looking forward to reading the judge’s written reasons once they’re released. Unlike commonly dealt with areas like family law, civil law, and contract law, it’s unclear what experience Justice McKelvey has in ruling on gambling law cases. Unfortunately, because Bodog no-showed, Justice McKelvey only heard arguments from Manitoba Liquor and Lotteries.
We don’t yet know how “applicable” the injunction is, both within Manitoba for other iGaming sites, and outside of Manitoba, where the injunction is persuasive but not binding on provincial courts. However, if you are advertising for Bodog (.eu or .net) in Manitoba, you may want to reconsider that approach.
We know that the Bodog injunction efforts are part of a strategy by the Canadian Lottery Coalition (CLC) to combat iGaming that is not authorized by a province. I am looking forward to the CLC’s next steps.
As always, I’m available to chat about how this decision potentially impacts your business. Reach out through LinkedIn or by email at jack@gmelawyers.com.
