Feds harassing foreign gaming execs

[otctrader]

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArti...BETONSPORTS.xml (http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=stocksNews&storyID=2006-07-17T105707Z_01_NOA731944_RTRUKOC_0_LEISURE-BETONSPORTS.xml)

Glad to see our resources put to good work!

[Wynton]

This could get verrrry interesting.

[DING-DONG YO]

Just amazing. Do we not give the finger to the rest of the world enough?

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

I can't imagine that this is good news.

On the other hand, if it causes a major diplomatic furor, maybe so. You wouldn't think that the Brits are too happy about this.

[Losing all]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't imagine that this is good news.



[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't this pretty much the same situation that Cohen (I think that's his name) from WSEX was in a few years ago?granted, Cohen is an American. At any rate that was bad news for him, not us.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I can't imagine that this is good news.



[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't this pretty much the same situation that Cohen (I think that's his name) from WSEX was in a few years ago?granted, Cohen is an American. At any rate that was bad news for him, not us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, Cohen was an American, which made the circumstances surrounding his arrest much less complicated.

Can you imagine what would happen if the CEO of a NASDAQ company was detained in London en route to Frankfurt because the British authorities had some or another issue with him?

[Losing all]

Good point. Maybe I'm a dreamer, but couldn't this be unrelated (to ol-gambling). He looks like a terrorist /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Wynton]

I actually think this is decent news, as it could prompt a wider debate about the logic of the US approach.

[meleader2]

[ QUOTE ]
I actually think this is decent news, as it could prompt a wider debate about the logic of the US approach.

[/ QUOTE ]

u think the debate would happen within the US?? hahahahaah! come on, man!

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
I actually think this is decent news, as it could prompt a wider debate about the logic of the US approach.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think there are two basic principles operating here:

1) All else being equal, things which complicate the legislation tend to be Good.

2) All else being equal, things that raise the profile of the legislation tend to be Bad.

Whether 1) or 2) prevails here, I'm not certain. Poker stocks tumbled tremendously when this news first came out, but then recovered most (though not all) of that loss after the market had more time to think this through.

The best case is where it pisses the Brits off enough to the point that they start threatening WTO actions against the US.

[Wynton]

Well, it's an interesting political debate. But my view is that the more publicity this issue gets, the better. I'm mostly worried about a bill sneaking through the Senate, before everyone even tangentially affected has a chance to voice an opinion.

[Pinchot]

[ QUOTE ]
2) All else being equal, things that raise the profile of the legislation tend to be Bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

You think so? I gather you've been watching this pretty closely Nate so I'm interested as to why you think this.

I think some of the press it got this week, especially on the Daily Show, highlighted just how absurd the bill is.

[IronDragon1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2) All else being equal, things that raise the profile of the legislation tend to be Bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

You think so? I gather you've been watching this pretty closely Nate so I'm interested as to why you think this.

I think some of the press it got this week, especially on the Daily Show, highlighted just how absurd the bill is.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would agree with this statement. To wit, nearly every editorial I've read-about a dozen or so, many from rural areas that you'd suspect would favor this sort of thing-only one I can remember actually called the legislation a good idea.

Quite honestly the problem isn't public opinion (I would expect that if you were to put this to some huge nationwide referenda I believe it would be defeated by a surprisingly sound margin) but the will to actually take action to do something about it.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2) All else being equal, things that raise the profile of the legislation tend to be Bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

You think so? I gather you've been watching this pretty closely Nate so I'm interested as to why you think this.

I think some of the press it got this week, especially on the Daily Show, highlighted just how absurd the bill is.

[/ QUOTE ]

My assumption is that there needs to be a fair amount of political willpower in the Senate to get this passed, since there apparently isn't much apparent momentum on the issue in that chamber, and since the calendar is otherwise very constrained. Things that raise the public awareness of the debate might make GOP leaders more convinced that they can score cheap political points by passing this measure. If a bill passes in the forest and nobody hears it, does it make a sound?

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
The best case is where it pisses the Brits off enough to the point that they start threatening WTO actions against the US.

[/ QUOTE ]
More likely we will start handing them over than protesting.

I'm afriad you're on your own sorting this mess out. All you'll get from outside is money/lobbying.

chez

[Pinchot]

That makes sense Nate. Hopefully if the bill does stir up attention the public opinion of HR 4411 is negative. From what I've seen initially from the press, it has looked good for us.

Also, FWIW, I've got a friend on the Senate side of the house and he said that YouTube link from the Jon Stewart show has been ridiculously popular over there for the past week. He also said he doesn't think the Senate will have time to get to the bill, but that's been discussed here ad naseum.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, FWIW, I've got a friend on the Senate side of the house and he said that YouTube link from the Jon Stewart show has been ridiculously popular over there for the past week. He also said he doesn't think the Senate will have time to get to the bill, but that's been discussed here ad naseum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, there may be some truth to this line of thinking too. If the Senate leadership is convinced that the political impact of this is likely to be neutral-to-somewhat-negative, then obviously that reduces the incentives to pass the bill.

[Little_Luck]

That's awesome news if that YouTube link is popular over there. I am glad the humor/point of the story isn't lost on them.

[Wynton]

The exec debates online gambling with Rep. Leach a couple of months ago (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114375000762012631-14PeRy_IGy_Ax75SChM_gejdynE_20070403.html?mod=tff_ main_tff_top)

[mattnxtc]

Leach showed his incompetence when charged on every issue...I loved it

[Self Made]

I can't wait for the next move here: British government starts arresting American executives visiting London who operate businesses that might be illegal if they operated in the UK.

[Self Made]

Post deleted by Ryan Beal

[Losing all]

After a quick scan of SBR I'm not so sure this is what it looks like, or that we should feel sorry for this clown. I know it's a longshot, but could this possibly be about BoS STEALING from Americans?

[Uglyowl]

his detention was a politically motivated act:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13907193/

[Losing all]

"We are player watchdogs and we have been watching Carruthers and BoS steal players money. Thats all that concerns SBR. They should pay back the recent thefts and stop stealing players money." -SBR John

SBR obviously has their own agenda. That being said they rarely use this kind of language except for the worst of the worst.

[Uglyowl]

Post deleted by Ryan Beal

[Russ Fox]

You can find a longer version of the story here. (http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/15059210.htm) It appears that Carruthers is being charges under the Wire Act; indeed, it looks like an instant replay of the Jay Cohen case. Carruthers' future looks like prison to this non-attorney.

-- Russ

[Zele]

Is anyone else having Khodorkovsky flashbacks?

[PokerStorm]

They must finally have proof that the Tribeca network is rigged. Lock him up and throw away the key, the dodgy rivers on that network cost me a fortune.

[Russ Fox]

The Wall Street Journal has a summary up on their pay site. It states that 11 individuals and four companies were indicted. Betonsports received a US temporary restraining order ordering it not to accept wagers from US customers. Other charges relate to not paying federal wagering excise tax on over $3 billion of wagers. The RICO charges have underlying charges of mail fraud, wire fraud, operating an illegal gambling business, and money laundering.

[article at WSJ Pay Site (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115316139480608868.html?mod=googlenews_wsj) ]

-- Russ

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

Here is the official statement from the DOJ.

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2006/July/06_crm_443.html

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MONDAY, JULY 17, 2006
www.USDOJ.GOV (http://www.USDOJ.GOV)
CRM
(202) 514-2007
TDD (202) 514-1888

Eleven Individuals and Four Corporations Indicted on Racketeering, Conspiracy and Fraud Charges

WASHINGTON – A federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Missouri has returned a 22-count indictment charging 11 individuals and four corporations on various charges of racketeering, conspiracy and fraud, the Department of Justice announced today. The indictment was returned on June 1, 2006, and unsealed today.

BetonSports PLC, a publicly-traded holding company that owns a number of Internet sportsbooks and casinos, was among the companies charged in the indictment. The founder of BetonSports.com, Gary Stephen Kaplan, 47, was charged with 20 felony violations of federal laws including: the Wire Act, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Conspiracy, interstate transportation of gambling paraphernalia, interference with the administration of Internal Revenue laws and tax evasion.

Other defendants in the racketeering conspiracy include: Kaplan’s siblings, Neil Scott Kaplan and Lori Kaplan Multz; Norman Steinberg; David Carruthers, chief executive officer of BetonSports.com; Peter Wilson, media director for BetonSports.com; and Tim Brown, Steinberg’s son-in-law. The three other charged companies, all Florida-based, were Direct Mail Expertise, Inc., DME Global Marketing and Fulfillment Inc. and Mobile Promotions Inc. Also charged are William Hernan Lenis; Monica Lenis and Manny Gustavo Lenis, owners and operators of the Florida companies; and William Hernan Lenis’ son, William Luis Lenis.

“Illegal commercial gambling across state and international borders is a crime,” said U.S Attorney Catherine L. Hanaway of the Eastern District of Missouri. “Misuse of the Internet to violate the law can ultimately only serve to harm legitimate businesses. This indictment is but one step in a series of actions designed to punish and seize the profits of individuals who disregard federal and state laws.”

The indictment alleges that Gary Kaplan started his gambling enterprise via operation of a sportsbook in New York City in the early 1990s. After Kaplan was arrested on New York state gambling charges in May 1993, Kaplan moved his betting operation to Florida and eventually offshore to Costa Rica. According to the indictment, BetonSports.com, the most visible outgrowth of Kaplan’s sports bookmaking enterprise, misleadingly advertised itself as the “World’s Largest Legal and Licensed Sportsbook.” The indictment also alleges that Kaplan failed to pay federal wagering excise taxes on more than $3.3 billion in wagers taken from the United States and seeks forfeiture of $4.5 billion from Kaplan and his co-defendants, as well as various properties.

The indictment alleges that Gary Kaplan and Norman Steinberg, as the owners and operators of Millennium Sportsbook, Gibraltar Sportsbook, and North American Sports Association, took or caused their employees to take bets from undercover federal agents in St. Louis who used undercover identities to open wagering accounts. The indictment also alleges that Kaplan and Mobile Promotions illegally transported equipment used to place bets and transmit wagering information across state lines and that DME Global Marketing and Fulfillment shipped equipment to Costa Rica from Florida for BetonSports.com.

The racketeering conspiracy alleges that the defendants agreed to conduct an enterprise through a pattern of racketeering acts, including repeated mail fraud, wire fraud, operation of an illegal gambling business and money laundering.

In conjunction with the indictment, the United States has filed a civil complaint in federal court to obtain an order requiring BetonSports PLC to stop taking sports bets from the United States, and to return money held in wagering accounts to account holders in the United States. U.S. District Judge Catherine D. Perry issued the temporary restraining order today. A hearing in the civil case has been requested within 10 days. As authorized by federal statute, the FBI is issuing letters to four telephone companies, instructing them to stop providing phone service to the Internet sportsbooks and casinos operated by BetonSports PLC.

Gary Kaplan resides in Costa Rica and a warrant has been issued for his arrest. Neil Kaplan, 40, is in custody in Ft. Pierce, Florida. Carruthers, 49, a resident of Costa Rica and Bromsgrove, Worcestershire, England, is in custody in Ft. Worth, Texas. William Luis Lenis and Manny Gustavo Lenis are in custody in Miami. Tim Brown was arrested near Philadelphia. Warrants have been issued for the other defendants not currently in custody. The United States will seek extradition of all defendants to St. Louis for prosecution.

The charges are the result of a joint investigation by Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The prosecution is being conducted by the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement, the Tampa Police Department, the Jacksonville, Fla. Sheriff's Office, and NFL Security and NCAA Enforcement Office personnel also assisted in the investigation.

The charges set forth in an indictment are merely accusations, and each defendant is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.

###

06-443

[HSB]

Maybe this is a stupid question, but how the hell can the Justice Department try to apply American laws to people overseas? I would imagine that no part of this guy's company is in the US.

Assuming that's the case, how the hell can a US court apply to this guy at all?

[Wynton]

I think this a HUGE story.

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]
They must finally have proof that the Tribeca network is rigged. Lock him up and throw away the key, the dodgy rivers on that network cost me a fortune.

[/ QUOTE ]

His group controls Tribeca? I wonder if this is remotely connected to Doyle Brunson. Doesn't he control a skin (Doyle' Room)?

[BluffVin]

[ QUOTE ]
The indictment alleges that Gary Kaplan started his gambling enterprise via operation of a sportsbook in New York City in the early 1990s. After Kaplan was arrested on New York state gambling charges in May 1993, Kaplan moved his betting operation to Florida and eventually offshore to Costa Rica

[/ QUOTE ]

I am no expert and this is pure speculation. This analysis may be completely obvious to everyone else as well. But reading this passage, along with all the other articles, this does not appear to be as much of an online gambling case as everyone immediately jumped to think. In my interpretation the issue is that the company that BetOnSports was derived from was charged with taking sports bets while it existed in the US.

Therefore, whether BetOnSports was online or not, the feds were eventually going to go after the company, as clearly reviving your business in another country only to continue taking bets from Americans is a slap in the face to the charges they faced while being based in the US.

Now of course the motivation to actually go after the company may be derived from the recent fight against online gambling. But the main focus in my opinion does not appear to be based solely on the issue of the internet.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe this is a stupid question, but how the hell can the Justice Department try to apply American laws to people overseas? I would imagine that no part of this guy's company is in the US.

Assuming that's the case, how the hell can a US court apply to this guy at all?

[/ QUOTE ]

My layman's understanding is that:

1. There is nothing in US law that prohibits the US from charging a foreign national with a violation of US law.

2. There is nothing in international law that obligates a foreign national charged with a US crime to be sent to the US for trial or sentencing. However, these rights may be negotiated by treaty. Most countries that have good relations with one another have detailed extradition treaties, and the US certainly has one with Britain.

I don't know precisely what the implications are of the foreign national having enterred US territory. However, I would imagine that the presumption shifts in some important ways in these cases: possession is 9/10ths of the law.

It's important to keep in mind that a foreign suspect is probably not likely to be detained on a frivolous charge. In the case of BetOnSports, this was a company that operated a sports betting book, and accepted sports wagers from US citizens over the telephone. This makes the violation of the Wire Act much more clear. It also appears that BetOnSports may have been involved in other fraudulent activities such as tax evasion, which directly involved US-based companies and US citizens. These undoubtedly make the indictment more robust. Finally, BetOnSports has a reputation for being brash, amateurish, and sloppy, which will further help to strengthen the case.

[Wynton]

I need to read the indictment itself before passing judgment about whether this is at all related to internet gambling. My impression from that news release, though, is that internet gambling is encompassed within the charges, even if not the focal point of the indictment.

[Zele]

[ QUOTE ]
The RICO charges have underlying charges of mail fraud, wire fraud, operating an illegal gambling business, and money laundering.


[/ QUOTE ]

Fraud and money laundering sound like something specific other than just accepting bets from Americans, on the other hand this is a RICO case, which if I understand correctly means the prosectors can do anything they want to for any reason whatsoever.

[dustyn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They must finally have proof that the Tribeca network is rigged. Lock him up and throw away the key, the dodgy rivers on that network cost me a fortune.

[/ QUOTE ]

His group controls Tribeca? I wonder if this is remotely connected to Doyle Brunson. Doesn't he control a skin (Doyle' Room)?

[/ QUOTE ]

I scanned a press release - it appears BOS joined the Tribeca network as of Dec 05. So my guess is they aren't directly affiliated, nor is the Tribeca network rigged as another poster speculates, since the exec in question is not a founder of that network. Of course it's impossible to say for sure.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
I need to read the indictment itself before passing judgment about whether this is at all related to internet gambling. My impression from that news release, though, is that internet gambling is encompassed within the charges, even if not the focal point of the indictment.

[/ QUOTE ]

My guess is that the DoJ would not have been so brash as to indict and detain a foreign national on a 'pure' Internet gambling charge. Certainly, it would be a very ambitious interpetation of the RICO statute if that was all that was at issue here.

However, as long as he's been indicted on other charges, they're going to throw a bunch of sh*t at the wall and see what sticks. In this case, the Wire Act charges might well stick to the wall, since this company is appararently accepting sports bets by telephone.

Disclaimer: just a layman's opinion here.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

Another interpetation of this indictment is that, not only was BoS taking sports bets over the telephone, but that a substantial portion of the fulfilliment of these bets was actually conducted within US territory. BoS not only has a customer service line that operates through a US number, but also a "wagering line" that operates through a US number. (SportingBet and TradeSports do not have have any such "wagering line". In fact, TradeSports explicitly disclaims that actual bets/positions cannot be placed over the telephone).

In other words, this indictment is clearly about gambling. But it's not clear how much it is about Internet gambling. At first glance, it looks like BoS might have been incredibly sloppy, and that a certain portion of its business amounted to operating a fairly traditional (and clearly illegal) US-based, telephone-based sports betting racket.

EDIT: Finally, it's also clear, based on the names of the companies involved in the indictment, that BoS was very aggressive about using direct marketing services based out of the United States, that in turn marketed to US customers. There is a reason that this company was targeted.

[Wynton]

It really is impossible to evaluate the indictment based on the press release. Believe me, press releases do not necessarily reflect the actual charges accurately.

As of this writing, the indictment evidently has not yet been docketed electronically. But eventually, I should be able to locate an actual copy.

[PocketAces]

If this fellow had any inkling he could be charged with crimes in the U.S., he never should have set foot in the country.

Depending on where he's sent, he may need to prepare himself for some shower stall combat!

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
It really is impossible to evaluate the indictment based on the press release. Believe me, press releases do not necessarily reflect the actual charges accurately.

As of this writing, the indictment evidently has not yet been docketed electronically. But eventually, I should be able to locate an actual copy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. But, while this has clearly been a bad day, I think it's important to point out that there a number of material differences between this company and say PartyGaming.

[DrewOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
EDIT: Finally, it's also clear, based on the names of the companies involved in the indictment, that BoS was very aggressive about using direct marketing services based out of the United States, that in turn marketed to US customers. There is a reason that this company was targeted.


[/ QUOTE ]

No kidding. They even advertised the phone number directly both on the radio and in print media in the Philadelphia area. I imagine that this was nationwide as well. This has always struck me as very odd and sloppy, not unlike the Philadelphia Player's Club (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=cardroom&Number=4857316&S earchpage=1&Main=4857316&Words=%2BPhiladelphia+%2B Club&topic=&Search=true#Post4857316) incident. Openly advertising illegal activities is generally not a good idea.

[LinusKS]

Sorry, but you guys are grasping at straws.

All internet casinos are violating US laws by offering games here. Sportsbooks are particularly easy targets, but all of them are illegal.

Things that don't matter:

-- That the casino has a license from Costa Rica (or any other foreign country).

-- That it uses the internet.

-- That it's based offshore.

-- That the operators are citizens of other countries.

Sorry.

[illinio]

The tone of this statement in the DOJ release is worrying:

“Illegal commercial gambling across state and international borders is a crime,” said U.S Attorney Catherine L. Hanaway of the Eastern District of Missouri. “Misuse of the Internet to violate the law can ultimately only serve to harm legitimate businesses. This indictment is but one step in a series of actions designed to punish and seize the profits of individuals who disregard federal and state laws.”

I /images/graemlins/heart.gif Missouri

Edit: The statement itself also is of questionable validity

[mrhat187]

Actually if you read the wire act is specifically only speaks about sporting events or other such events and betting on those events. Never is there a mention of playing say black jack over the phone line.....because such technology had not be conceived. So while you could say that sports betting over the internet is clearly illegal, casino's and poker is more of a grey area as there is NO LAW. I repeat people may want you to think there is, but there is NO LAW concerning this........if there was......we wouldn't have the internet gambling bill in congress right now /images/graemlins/wink.gif. Common sense.

[Uglyowl]

Wow.. Neteller down 11% AND Party down 7% already even after yesterday.

[Overdrive]

I am ashamed to be an American. What a backward silly country run by right wing bible thumping hillbillies. I wish Britain would of won the revolutionary war. Things would be much better here if we had some sensible British people in charge of things instead of these american backwater hillbillies.

[Quanah Parker]

The guy they arrested is a US citizen.

Please leave hillbillies outta this. We hillbillies are fiercely independent and don't mess with other folks business.

[BruinEric]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe this is a stupid question, but how the hell can the Justice Department try to apply American laws to people overseas? I would imagine that no part of this guy's company is in the US.

Assuming that's the case, how the hell can a US court apply to this guy at all?

[/ QUOTE ]

My layman's belief on this is that if a person or business is doing business IN the United States and by doing so violates the laws of the United States, then he could be charged in such a way.

In this case, this company is doing business with USA residents and advertising in the USA.

For example, a drug supplier doing legal business in the Netherlands were to open a mail-order business and take orders from a guy in Phoenix -- he would surely be violating US Law, right?

How about an overseas company selling illegal items to US consumers IN the US such as illegal porn, bootleg CDs, counterfeit Gucci bags?

In none of these situations would the hypothetical defendant reside in or have a site in the USA, but would surely be subject to arrest if he visited here.

[BruinEric]

[ QUOTE ]

I /images/graemlins/heart.gif Missouri


[/ QUOTE ]

This appears to be a Federal Goverment affair with substantial effort by the Internal Revenue Service.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually if you read the wire act is specifically only speaks about sporting events or other such events and betting on those events. Never is there a mention of playing say black jack over the phone line.....because such technology had not be conceived. So while you could say that sports betting over the internet is clearly illegal, casino's and poker is more of a grey area as there is NO LAW. I repeat people may want you to think there is, but there is NO LAW concerning this........if there was......we wouldn't have the internet gambling bill in congress right now /images/graemlins/wink.gif. Common sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of laws that prohibit unlicensed gambling in the US. Each and every internet gambling company violates those laws, every day.

Focusing exclusively on the Wire Act simply confuses the picture.

As for legislators passing redundant laws... they do it all the time.

[otctrader]

BOS voluntarily shuts down:

http://www.betonsports.com/

[Colima420]

[ QUOTE ]
Just amazing. Do we not give the finger to the rest of the world enough?

[/ QUOTE ]

I am sick of this big bully country of ours wanting to control everything. God da... already. Why can't the US just worry about its own country. It just never stops. Historically, the US government has been sticking in its nose all over the world, and it never ends.
The US is one great country, no doubt, but the Imperialism it has makes me really ashamed of it.

[blueodum]

2. There is nothing in international law that obligates a foreign national charged with a US crime to be sent to the US for trial or sentencing. However, these rights may be negotiated by treaty. Most countries that have good relations with one another have detailed extradition treaties, and the US certainly has one with Britain.


*****

Extradition treaties between countries are very precise. I would be shocked if it turned out that the US could extradite a British subject from Britain for doing something that was perfectly legal in Britain.

For example, since Canada has no death penalty, the government will not extradite a murder suspect to the US unless they have a formal guarantee that the death penalty is off the table.

That's why this guy wasn't extradited - he had to be nabbed while on US territory.

[blueodum]

Things would be much better here if we had some sensible British people in charge of things instead of these american backwater hillbillies.

***********************

Yes. You'd have the good fortune of being known as "South Canada" ;-)

[Self Made]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of laws that prohibit unlicensed gambling in the US. Each and every internet gambling company violates those laws, every day.

Focusing exclusively on the Wire Act simply confuses the picture.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why weren't they charged with them? The only gambling charges in the indictment are the Wire Act and one count of Interstate Transportation of Gambling Paraphernalia (18 USC S1953; Carruthers and BOS weren't charged with it).

If the Federal government wants to charge gambling operators under current law, it'll be the Wire Act, just as it is in this case.

[blueodum]

For example, a drug supplier doing legal business in the Netherlands were to open a mail-order business and take orders from a guy in Phoenix -- he would surely be violating US Law, right?

*****

Not if the Phoenix-based guy came to Holland to buy the drugs.

That's essentially what happens online. By the magic of the technology, the US resident is whisked away to Costa Rica to place a wager or play poker or whatever. The event takes place on a server; the server is in Costa Rica; ergo, no US law has been broken.

Advertising is a different story. Whoever is responsible for US based ads of Offshore wagering using the phone (the Ad agency I would assume) is breaking the law. Advertising in cyberspace is not the same as advertising terrestrially. That's why internet ads always say "PartyPoker.com" and TV and magazine ads say "PartyPoker.net".

[blueodum]

LinusKC,

Activities that take place outside of the US are not subject to US laws.

[mrhat187]

Again.....I mean I don't think you got it the first time. So your reasoning is its already illegal and everyone off shore is setting up illegal sites, and the current legislation to ban all of this isn't necessary because its already illegal? I guess every Attorny General in every state, every rep. that voted for the bill, and basically everyone but you is wrong. I'll say it again and this might be tough to understand, use common sense if it was illegal, listen closely.....if it was already illegal, they wouldn't need a law banning it /images/graemlins/wink.gif. I'm hoping you have common sense, but I have my doubts.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of laws that prohibit unlicensed gambling in the US. Each and every internet gambling company violates those laws, every day.

Focusing exclusively on the Wire Act simply confuses the picture.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why weren't they charged with them? The only gambling charges in the indictment are the Wire Act and one count of Interstate Transportation of Gambling Paraphernalia (18 USC S1953; Carruthers and BOS weren't charged with it).

If the Federal government wants to charge gambling operators under current law, it'll be the Wire Act, just as it is in this case.

[/ QUOTE ]

According to the indictment, the crimes alleged include violations of:

1. The Wire Wager Act
2. Mail Fraud
3. Wire Fraud
4. Interstate travel in aid of Racketeering Enterprise
5. Operation of an Illegal Gambling Business
6. Interstate transportation of Gambling Paraphernalia
7. Money Laundering.

The indictment didn't charge violations of state laws, because it was a Federal indictment brought by a Federal US Attorney.

The states rarely go after cases like this, because they don't have the resources to do it. In fact, that's one of the justifications for these kinds of laws in the first place.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]

Not if the Phoenix-based guy came to Holland to buy the drugs.

That's essentially what happens online. By the magic of the technology, the US resident is whisked away to Costa Rica to place a wager or play poker or whatever. The event takes place on a server; the server is in Costa Rica; ergo, no US law has been broken.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry, blue, but you're wrong. The internet is not magic, and when you place a bet in Tulsa, OK, you're not whisked away anywhere, and the gambling takes place exactly where it looks like it's happening - in Tulsa.


Mrhat - Yes, internet gambling is already illegal, and yes offshore sites are violating US laws when they do business in America.

Whether HR4411 is "necessary" is up to legislators, but it doesn't have to be necessary for them to pass it. In fact, it doesn't even have to be a good idea.

[Zele]

[ QUOTE ]

Mrhat - Yes, internet gambling is already illegal

[/ QUOTE ]

Certain forms of internet gambling are explicitly legal in the United States.

[LinusKS]

Which ones?

[Zele]

The Oregon Lottery, for one.

Also horse racing and fantasy sports.

[mbeats]

What about the players who have active accounts. Will the site take the money and run?