HOPE!!!!!!

[rockythecat99]

http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_news/article/3348

Hope is in the air.

[Lego05]

Go Antigua...kick our asses.

[Rubeskies]

So according to this article, even if the U.S. is ruled against, the worst thing that can happen to them is to have sanctions placed on them by Antigua?

Yawn

[HSB]

I think it is safe to say the US couldn't care less about WTO rulings or sanctions by Antigua.

Perhaps it might make a difference in a case of extradition where a country might not extradite due to this crap...but I doubt it.

[Lego05]

Yea but hopefully the larger nations will pressure us to comply as well.

[Rubeskies]

[ QUOTE ]
Yea but hopefully the larger nations will pressure us to comply as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sadly, this will cost them billions in trade and as we all know, $$$ rules.

[MiltonFriedman]

"According to Antigua’s legal advisor Mark Mendelson"

Not a good sign when the reporter cannot get his source's name spelled correctly. The guy's last name is Mendel, not Mendelson.

In any event, anyone who thinks that the EU, Japan and China are going to see through a trade war with the US on behalf of Antigua on an Internet gaming issue has no clue about the world we live in.

There may be some posturing, while these three big boys swing an Antigua-stick toward the US for some purpose of their own. However, you can bank on that third-party support being dropped as soon as some deal is reached on bilateral matters of dispute.

[tipperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
So according to this article, even if the U.S. is ruled against, the worst thing that can happen to them is to have sanctions placed on them by Antigua?

Yawn

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you have it all wrong. GW Bush will wake up after the WTO rules against us and say:
[ QUOTE ]

"I'm really concerned that the rest of the world views the US as a bully. And besides, we gave our word as nation not to violate WTO rules and now impartial judges have ruled we've done just that. This situation is untenable. I will ask the Congress to overturn that gambling ban. Besides, I'm pretty good at 2-7 TD and it's almost never spread live. A guy needs to do something after retirement."


[/ QUOTE ]

[damaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So according to this article, even if the U.S. is ruled against, the worst thing that can happen to them is to have sanctions placed on them by Antigua?

Yawn

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you have it all wrong. GW Bush will wake up after the WTO rules against us and say:
[ QUOTE ]

"I'm really concerned that the rest of the world views the US as a bully. And besides, we gave our word as nation not to violate WTO rules and now impartial judges have ruled we've done just that. This situation is untenable. I will ask the Congress to overturn that gambling ban. Besides, I'm pretty good at 2-7 TD and it's almost never spread live. A guy needs to do something after retirement."


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

The point of WTO sanctions isn't that you say, "Gee, I guess we are wrong" and change out of a desire to do right. You change because they impose meaningful, painful sanctions. Now, Antigua simply lacks the power to hurt us, but the EC could. That's really where the hope lies.

[JPFisher55]

It also provides a legal argument against the UIGEA in court. Federal laws are not supposed to violate international treaties. Liberals are already planning to challenge the new terrorist tribuanl and interrogation law on the grounds that it violates the Geneva Convention.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
Liberals are already planning to challenge the new terrorist tribuanl and interrogation law on the grounds that it violates (insert Liberal Pansy reason here)

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry to stray OT but I believe the Supreme Court paved the way for Congress to do exactly this, highly unlikely they will rule against themselves. A good reason why is that the bill makes clear that the Geneva Conventions and its protocols are not self-executing and that they cannot be used as a "source of rights" to challenge the legality of a military commission. Nowhere in it's history has the Supreme Court ever ruled that a non self-executing treaty cannot be overturned by Congress's passing of a valid law.

This opposition by Democrats is simply to solidify their base, not due to any belief of human rights or higher moral position.

The same reason why the WTO treaty can be bypassed by a law of Congress is why any WTO ruling will be rightfully ignored.

[JPFisher55]

But they ruled that the laws establishing military tribunals must conform to the Geneva Convention. They also ruled that the treatment and interrogation of the detainees must conform to the Geneva Convention. You are right about the motives of the Democrats, but the ACLU is going to file litigation against the new tribunal and interrogation law on the grounds that it violates the Geneva Convention.

[pifhluk]

If anything it gives China the argument which Im sure they have already had of "If you dont have to follow WTO rulings, why do we?"

Not sure that this will help us at all but hey ill take another out.

[RGL]

Not an expert, and certainly not infallible. Just trying to add a little something to the discussion.

I think I read in another thread a week+ ago that the WTO can grant relief to Antigua and other parties to ignore U.S. copyright and patent laws. As I remember, it had occured once before and the U.S. immediately backed down. Think about the impact if Antigua (or China) were to be able to sell Hollywood and Silicon Valley product copies openly!

[r1base14]

I read an article about this as well. And if other nations file WTO complaints and get similar relief, then the US would have no choice by to back down.

R

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
Not an expert, and certainly not infallible. Just trying to add a little something to the discussion.

I think I read in another thread a week+ ago that the WTO can grant relief to Antigua and other parties to ignore U.S. copyright and patent laws. As I remember, it had occured once before and the U.S. immediately backed down. Think about the impact if Antigua (or China) were to be able to sell Hollywood and Silicon Valley product copies openly!

[/ QUOTE ]

Now that would be sweet.

[Beavis68]

do you really think china is obeying all WTO laws?

[Little_Luck]

I thought the WTO was America's puppet?

I gave up all hope, which means I have nowhere to go but up.

[Wake up CALL]

[ QUOTE ]
But they ruled that the laws establishing military tribunals must conform to the Geneva Convention. They also ruled that the treatment and interrogation of the detainees must conform to the Geneva Convention.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are mixing your Supreme Court rulings by being confused by the high courts ruling on a single appeal by Salim Ahmed Hamdan and a prior challenge as it pertained to the Detainee Treatment Act. These two distinct ruling cannot be intertwined to come to the conclusion you posted particularly since the most recent majority opinion ruling clearly states, "Congress has not issued the executive a 'blank check,' " Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in a concurring opinion. "Indeed, Congress has denied the president the legislative authority to create military commissions of the kind at issue here."

Breyer noted, however, that "nothing prevents the president from returning to Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary."

Which he has done and the authority has been granted, the ACLU can appeal all they wish but the prior ruling was so clear that all the President needed was Congressional authority (whcih he now has) in order to prosecute detainees via a military tribunal rather than in our civillian court system. It is nearly certain the the US Supreme Court will refuse to revisit any such appeal or claim by the ACLU as it pertains to military tribunals held within the constraints defined and passed by the US Congress.

[Sand]

[ QUOTE ]
So according to this article, even if the U.S. is ruled against, the worst thing that can happen to them is to have sanctions placed on them by Antigua?

Yawn

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought that the US would have other rulings in favor of the US suspended until such time as they complied with this one (assuming they are ruled against).

This would be high motivation as we use the WTO a bunch to go after trade disputes.

[RGL]

China is probably not obeying all copyright and patent laws now, granted. The difference would be that countries would be able to sell the knockoffs legally and openly on the internet after a WTO ruling. That could really have teeth.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
So according to this article, even if the U.S. is ruled against, the worst thing that can happen to them is to have sanctions placed on them by Antigua?

Yawn

[/ QUOTE ]

Those sanctions include allowing Antigua to ignore U.S. copyright laws. I can guarantee that our corporations getting pissy about this is much more important to our Congressmen than online gambling. :P

[AKQJ10]

Regarding the patent/trademark enforcement angle: http://www.theagitator.com/archives/027144.php#027144