U.S. Threatens Action Against Online Gambling

[Winetalk.com]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/15/technolo...43fbcb8b57be69c (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/15/technology/15GAMB.html?ex=1080328214&ei=1&en=e43fbcb8b57be69c)

[Rolo]

Interesting - more evidence of how the goverment is going after the supply chain, when it comes to internet issues...

Meds yesterday, casinos today, extreme violent and porn sites tomorrow.

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by Rolo@Mar 15 2004, 09:57 AM
Interesting - more evidence of how the goverment is going after the supply chain, when it comes to internet issues...

Meds yesterday, casinos today, extreme violent and porn sites tomorrow.
and who is next?
you? me?

the local cemetery is FULL of people who were absolutelly INNOCENT

[TheEnforcer]

More government intrusion into people's private lives and business. :angry: And it's only going to get worse before it gets better. :(

[Carrie]

"The investigation of the Internet gambling industry, lawyers said, is being run by Raymond W. Gruender, the United States attorney in the Eastern District of Missouri."

Say hello to the next guy trying to make a name for himself.

[Carrie]

Also, why is betting across state lines illegal, but betting in multi-state lotteries is not?

[stargaze]

Originally posted by Carrie@Mar 15 2004, 08:36 AM
"The investigation of the Internet gambling industry, lawyers said, is being run by Raymond W. Gruender, the United States attorney in the Eastern District of Missouri."

Say hello to the next guy trying to make a name for himself.
Missouri..The show me state...Attorney General John Ashcroft :-))

Supply Chain...Google & Overture love the traffic..They do a tap dance with this stuff

[masterp74]

If they we're smart the feds should make it legal and tax the shit out of of all of em. People online who gamble WILL gamble, they can't stop every single person from clicking on a button.. All the other countries don't mind taking bets from americans. So why should we give them all the money.



me 2 cents



Last edited by masterp74 at Mar 15 2004, 09:07 AM

[jimmyf]

Originally posted by Carrie@Mar 15 2004, 08:37 AM
Also, why is betting across state lines illegal, but betting in multi-state lotteries is not?
because they control it.. they want there share Tax's.

THERE share :zoinks:

[JR]

Originally posted by Rolo@Mar 15 2004, 06:57 AM
Interesting - more evidence of how the goverment is going after the supply chain, when it comes to internet issues...

Meds yesterday, casinos today, extreme violent and porn sites tomorrow.
they have always been going after online casinos and drug stores and changing/modifying the laws and even arresting people. its nothing new.... it's been going on for more than half a decade.

[*KK*]

Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Mar 15 2004, 07:03 AM

the local cemetery is FULL of people who were absolutelly INNOCENT
So is every state prison ;)

Sportsbook betting is a very dangerous proposition online for US companies, something to do with the Wire Act of 1963 or thereabouts --

[Winetalk.com]

Originally posted by *KK*@Mar 15 2004, 03:43 PM

So is every state prison ;)


and county jails too!
;-)
I spent nite in one being ABSOLUTELLY innocent, state dropped the charges for lack of evidence, but...my ribs still remember the concrete floor and tart oranges for breakfast
;-))))

[Nickatilynx]

My crystal ball is showing me something... :)

Too many powerful groups with their own agenda do not want wide spread online gambling legal.

However , eventually online casinos will be legal in the US.

If owned and operated under a federal license , which will only be granted to owners of "real world" casino's (ie MGM Grand ,Mirage etc)

They will not say this licensing is because the politicians were bought to protect the multibillion dollar investment of "Real World Casinos" but to protect the interest of consumers.(Only casinos with real underlying investments can trade to protect the interest of consumers)

An online casino owned and operated by Foxwoods , say, and with the "Real World Casino " standing behind it ,will be a great product to mail :-))))

damn..the image is fading


;-)))

[SykkBoy]

Originally posted by Nickatilynx@Mar 15 2004, 04:05 PM
My crystal ball is showing me something... :)

Too many powerful groups with their own agenda do not want wide spread online gambling legal.

However , eventually online casinos will be legal in the US.

If owned and operated under a federal license , which will only be granted to owners of "real world" casino's (ie MGM Grand ,Mirage etc)

They will not say this licensing is because the politicians were bought to protect the multibillion dollar investment of "Real World Casinos" but to protect the interest of consumers.(Only casinos with real underlying investments can trade to protect the interest of consumers)

An online casino owned and operated by Foxwoods , say, and with the "Real World Casino " standing behind it ,will be a great product to mail :-))))

damn..the image is fading


;-)))
They've already paved the way for Real World Casinos to operate online casinos in the state of Nevada. The licensing fee will be around $500K.
It's pretty well know that Steve Wynn has more influence than any elected official will ever have.

Ther's an underground joke that Steve Wynn would never run for public office because he couldn't deal wih losing power. ;-)

I've always thought this, that once the big Real World Casinos caught wind of online gambling profits, they'd step in and attempt to take over or at least make things more favorable for them.

[Nickatilynx]

Originally posted by SykkBoy+Mar 15 2004, 01:09 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (SykkBoy @ Mar 15 2004, 01:09 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--Nickatilynx@Mar 15 2004, 04:05 PM
My crystal ball is showing me something... :)

Too many powerful groups with their own agenda do not want wide spread online gambling legal.

However , eventually online casinos will be legal in the US.

If owned and operated under a federal license , which will only be granted to owners of "real world" casino's (ie MGM Grand ,Mirage etc)

They will not say this licensing is because the politicians were bought to protect the multibillion dollar investment of "Real World Casinos" but to protect the interest of consumers.(Only casinos with real underlying investments can trade to protect the interest of consumers)

An online casino owned and operated by Foxwoods , say, and with the "Real World Casino " standing behind it ,will be a great product to mail :-))))

damn..the image is fading


;-)))
They've already paved the way for Real World Casinos to operate online casinos in the state of Nevada. The licensing fee will be around $500K.
It's pretty well know that Steve Wynn has more influence than any elected official will ever have.

Ther's an underground joke that Steve Wynn would never run for public office because he couldn't deal wih losing power. ;-)

I've always thought this, that once the big Real World Casinos caught wind of online gambling profits, they'd step in and attempt to take over or at least make things more favorable for them.[/b][/quote]
All bow to Gypsy Nick!!!!!!!

:agrin:

[gonzo]

Originally posted by *KK*@Mar 15 2004, 03:43 PM

So is every state prison ;)


Youd love the prisons down here....especially Reidsville.
They got one level above where they had "Hannibal" like cons.
Its a room big enough for a cot.

Food slips in tray comes out.

Gotta use the toilet?

Yell for the guard.
Strip search upon exit from the cell.
Toilet break
Strip search prior to reentry to cell.

Aint that the good life?

[*KK*]

EVERY legal casino in the states has a vested interest in preventing the spread of online gaming, since one day it will come to pass that they have licenses to do it legally with US citizens.

The biggest obstacles I think at this point to it are splitting up the taxes amongst the various states that will be participating -- and figuring out how much they will tax -- and then creating an environment where people aren't allowed to use credit cards -- only debit products -- to gamble with; this is something that could be easily done by BIN number filtering and shouldn't be a problem.

The one problem that will come up is cardholders who live in states where gambling is illegal but hold cards from states where it is allowed... that does pose a few issues with the BIN system but AVS match should work... perhaps Lee can revisit her zip code list and sell it to the casinos ;)

[Nickatilynx]

Nice , how you slipped in the leenoga burn there :)

:wnw:

[APTour]

PRESS RELEASE

ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA FILES SUBMISSION TO WTO DISPUTES PANEL AGAINST THE US

Geneva , 1 st October …The government of Antigua and Barbuda today met a deadline set by a Disputes Panel of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) by filing its first submission in a complaint brought against the United States .

The WTO set up the Panel to adjudicate the dispute between Antigua and Barbuda and the United States over the provision of cross-border gambling and betting services from Antigua and Barbuda to consumers in the United States .

Sir Ronald Sanders, Chief Foreign Affairs Representative of Antigua and Barbuda , said “We are pleased that our case is proceeding according to the schedule set by the Panel. We look forward to hearing the response of the United States . As a small country with very little in the way of viable exports, the gaming industry represents a vital area of our development of electronic commerce for a global market. We believe very strongly in our case under the law”.

Under the WTO dispute resolution process, the United States has four weeks in which to provide its response to the Antigua and Barbuda submission.

Antigua and Barbuda 's claim is based upon the WTO's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The authorities of the small Caribbean island-state argue that the United States is violating its own commitments to WTO member countries under the GATS by prohibiting the provision of cross-border gambling and betting services from Antigua .

The WTO dispute Panel will have formal hearings in November, and expects to give a ruling by the end of February 2004. (ends)

[masterp74]

this was from www.sports911.com (http://www.sports911.com)


INTERNET BETTING BOOST FROM WASHINGTON

Can it be confined to horse racing?

State legislators in Washington have apparently given their blessing to betting over the internet, which could set an important precedent if not made the subject of those notorious "exceptions".

Online and telephone wagering could be open to its citizens after legislators approved a new bill last week proposing that residents should be allowed to bet on horse racing through state approved Internet sites.

The concern appears to be that Washington is losing valuable tax revenue to offshore sites which they cannot control, leading to the vote in the Washington House of Representatives of 79-17 in favour of the Bill. The proposal was actually a "tweaked" Senate Bill 6481 which had earlier passed 38 - 10 in that body. It now goes to the Senate where it is expected to be approved, and from there to Governor Gary Locke.

Under the new proposals, bettors will be able to open accounts which they can access over the Internet or telephone. Bets can then be placed without having to be at the track or physically present at one of the existing state approved betting facilities.

Emerald Downs, Washington’s best-known racetrack, welcomed the move, claiming that significant revenue had been lost in recent years to illegal betting operations.

Antigambling lawmakers argued strongly against the bill, saying it amounts to a massive expansion of legalized betting in Washington that will increase problems associated with gambling addicts.

But Rep. Jeff Morris summed up the view of many legislators when he said he supported the bill because he felt trying to prohibit I-gaming wasn't a viable option.

"You can't really stop the Internet," he said. "It doesn't have borders."

[Rolo]

Originally posted by JR@Mar 15 2004, 09:40 AM
it's been going on for more than half a decade.
I agree, however many still think the internet is without boundaries. Ex. companies/webmasters/affiliates who have sent traffic to sites which they know are questionable or illegal - thinking that they are safe, because they do not own these sites.

[masterp74]

Originally posted by Rolo+Mar 16 2004, 12:39 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rolo @ Mar 16 2004, 12:39 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin--JR@Mar 15 2004, 09:40 AM
it's been going on for more than half a decade.
I agree, however many still think the internet is without boundaries. Ex. companies/webmasters/affiliates who have sent traffic to sites which they know are questionable or illegal - thinking that they are safe, because they do not own these sites.[/b][/quote]
what about yahoo and google?


they take gambling ads.

[Rolo]

I´m not a lawyer, and do not know google and yahoo businessplan for taking ads. I guess they have deep pockets to fight, while others do not.

I know this thread is about gambling, however I´m sure that its just a matter of time before foreign sites with a mix of extreme violence and sex will see the same action against them.

[Dravyk]

"The investigation of the Internet gambling industry, lawyers said, is being run by Raymond W. Gruender, the United States attorney in the Eastern District of Missouri." Say hello to the next guy trying to make a name for himself.
Odds are (pun intended) he's running for re-election or aspires to be governor.

because they control it.. they want there share Tax's.
Like gasoline, cigarettes, etc, once the government(s) figure out how to get their piece of the action, gambling will be totally legal.

what about yahoo and google?
According to Tech Live newscast last night Yahoo and Google have said they have no plans to stop advertising gambling ads. (But who knows what they might say tomorrow.)

[Rolo]

Looks like Yahoo and Google have fallen


Google, Yahoo! ban gambling ads

Google and Yahoo! have decided to stop displaying advertisements for online casinos, said a report in The New York Times.

The two Internet giants have said that the move has been necessitated by the 'lack of clarity' in American regulations.

United States prosecutors, said The New York Times, had warned companies in March over the carrying of advertisements for offshore online casinos. Prosecutors had the display of such advertisements was tantamount to aiding and abetting.

Running online gambling sites from within the US is illegal.

While Yahoo! said that the ban on casino ads will apply to its US Web sites only, Google will ban them across the world. The l its sites worldwide. The change is likely to come in at the end of this month, said The New York Times.

Meanwhile, The Register said that some legal observers believe adverts for online gambling could be protected under free speech rights.

The World Trade Organisation had recently ruled that the US ban on online gambling was in breach of international trade law.


http://www.rediff.com/money/2004/apr/05gamble.htm

[Mike AI]

This is going to cut into some people's incomes who sell traffic to Google and Overture.

The feds are intervening because they do not want competition for themselves ( lottery) and for the State sanctioned Casinos.

The Vegas gambling lobby is very powerful when it comes to influencing the Feds.

[pushpills]

Meanwhile fm starts putting casinoonnet ads on exit chains.

[masterp74]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Apr 5 2004, 06:56 AM
This is going to cut into some people's incomes who sell traffic to Google and Overture.

The feds are intervening because they do not want competition for themselves ( lottery) and for the State sanctioned Casinos.

The Vegas gambling lobby is very powerful when it comes to influencing the Feds.
Last Updated: Thursday, 25 March, 2004, 14:57 GMT



Antigua beats US on online gaming


The Caribbean state of Antigua and Barbuda has beaten the US in a dispute over internet gambling.
The country relies on online gaming for much of its foreign currency earnings but was shut out of the US market by laws banning cross-border gambling.

It took the US to the World Trade Organisation, claiming that the ban was designed solely to protect the huge US betting business - and won.

The US says it will appeal against the WTO decision.


Federal law

The ruling at the WTO is only a preliminary one, and will now go to a seven-member appellate panel.

"We... will argue vigorously that this deeply flawed panel report must be correct," said a US trade spokesman.

The twin-island state's arguments, he said, ignored the fact that US commitments to open up its service industry were "clearly intended to exclude gambling when the US joined the WTO in 1995".

The ban is based on a 1961 federal law originally designed to cover telephone bets, which prohibits gambling across state lines.

Laundering fears

A much more recent law passed by the House of Representatives seeks to it illegal to pay for internet bets using a credit card.

The US bases its argument partly on the fact that online gaming is a haven for money launderers, and partly on fears that children might use their parents' credit cards to run up debts.

But Antigua's high commissioner in London and representative at the WTO, Sir Ronald Sanders, said online casinos provided about 3,000 jobs at home.

In any case, Antiguan casinos are only a small part of the US's online gaming problem.

The General Accounting Office has estimated that there are more than 1,800 internet gambling operations, posing a tough challenge to law enforcement.

[masterp74]

Originally posted by pushpills@Apr 5 2004, 07:02 AM
Meanwhile fm starts putting casinoonnet ads on exit chains.
Casino on net are the biggest spammers on Earth....and Mars