fishbutt
10-01-2006, 06:04 PM
this bill somewhat reminds me of the Napster/Grokster cases where Grokster was developed as a loophole to the Napster scandel. i thought of two possible loopholes...tell me what you think.
first, one way around this could be that the poker sites could allow you to charge merchandise like "Party Poker Sweatshirts" and whatnot to your account on their site. that way, they have a legal business of selling stuff and there is no way to tell that you are depositing money to an account there to buy a shirt or to play poker. this was, i believe, what got Grokster out of hot water -- because their software could be used for legal purposes, that meant it was legal even though it could be abused to be made illegal (if you shoot a person with a registered gun, is the gun dealer liable? no). i don't think this would fly here though because the software is specifically created for gambling, but...
second, what if they were to seperate the payment/playing into two, separate entities?
if the poker sites got rid of the "rake", and instead had payments for use of their software -- like $15 for the initial download and $2/hr to use the service/software -- this would make it more like a server like "XBox Live" and "World of Warcraft" rather then charging for *gambling*. this server would have nothing to do with officially placing bets and transferring money...just some good poker. plus, players would have the option to play free money games too.
then, the second part, would be something along the lines of just a neteller account that gets charged by the poker sites each time you play. ie: say i play for 2 hrs and lose $50 playing 1/2 limit (or whatever). then the poker site charges my neteller account $4 for playing and my account is also sent a list of neteller accounts (other player's accounts) and how much I owe them/they owe me. then neteller simply transfers the money around until I either get what is owed to me or I pay what I lost.
in this way, there is no "depositing" money into poker accounts, but rather just some shifting of money around. now, of course, this would greatly increase traffic on neteller but since neither officially "knows" that gambling is going on, this could get around it. or do you think it's just shifting the blame from the poker sites to neteller one problem is that credit card companies might then simply block transfers to neteller, which I guess would defeat the whole purpose of this system.
can anyone else think of possible ways around this bill that could either 1) keep the fishies playing or, better yet, 2) make it legal?
first, one way around this could be that the poker sites could allow you to charge merchandise like "Party Poker Sweatshirts" and whatnot to your account on their site. that way, they have a legal business of selling stuff and there is no way to tell that you are depositing money to an account there to buy a shirt or to play poker. this was, i believe, what got Grokster out of hot water -- because their software could be used for legal purposes, that meant it was legal even though it could be abused to be made illegal (if you shoot a person with a registered gun, is the gun dealer liable? no). i don't think this would fly here though because the software is specifically created for gambling, but...
second, what if they were to seperate the payment/playing into two, separate entities?
if the poker sites got rid of the "rake", and instead had payments for use of their software -- like $15 for the initial download and $2/hr to use the service/software -- this would make it more like a server like "XBox Live" and "World of Warcraft" rather then charging for *gambling*. this server would have nothing to do with officially placing bets and transferring money...just some good poker. plus, players would have the option to play free money games too.
then, the second part, would be something along the lines of just a neteller account that gets charged by the poker sites each time you play. ie: say i play for 2 hrs and lose $50 playing 1/2 limit (or whatever). then the poker site charges my neteller account $4 for playing and my account is also sent a list of neteller accounts (other player's accounts) and how much I owe them/they owe me. then neteller simply transfers the money around until I either get what is owed to me or I pay what I lost.
in this way, there is no "depositing" money into poker accounts, but rather just some shifting of money around. now, of course, this would greatly increase traffic on neteller but since neither officially "knows" that gambling is going on, this could get around it. or do you think it's just shifting the blame from the poker sites to neteller one problem is that credit card companies might then simply block transfers to neteller, which I guess would defeat the whole purpose of this system.
can anyone else think of possible ways around this bill that could either 1) keep the fishies playing or, better yet, 2) make it legal?