CardPlayer article about WTO

[IndyFish]

Didn't see this posted anywhere yet, so forgive me if someone beat me to it.

Article. (http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_law/article/1566)

[metsandfinsfan]

good article thx

[demon102]

thanks for posting man hopefully the WTO will help us get rid of this new legilation

[poorolrich]

Ok, so, the WTO will rule in favor of Antigua and Barbuda early next year. It is my understanding(I could be wrong) that when the WTO rules in favor of the two countries they will be the only Countries that can impose some kind of penalty. They were the only two Countries that actually filed the complaint. So, do you'all really think that the US is scared/worried of those two small countries??? If they add a value tax on imports from the US the US can just say fine, we won't ship anything to you anymore. It won't make a dent in our economy but would cripple theirs. This ruling will have little if any affect on the US. Now, if all the countries were to file a complaint then the US will be in dire straits.
Just my humble opinion.

[MiltonFriedman]

This doesn't chage your point, but it would aid your credibility in arguments.

Antigua can NOT raise tariffs on goods imported from the US. That is insane to expect.

Also, do NOT expect the Brits to jump on the bandwagon here. They have their own agenda and issues and are fleeing the US market. The recent "meeting" in London this week was a complete disaster. The result were press reports slamming online gaming as money-laundering.

[poorolrich]

Of course your right--Need to drink coffee first. I think Antigua CAN raise tariffs on imports from the US but like I said it would hurt them a lot more than the US. I really don't think any other country will file a complaint so it will be business as usual after the ruling. There are few countries out there, if any, that can afford to take on the US regarding WTO violations.

[JPFisher55]

Actually, what they are thinking about is ignoring US copyrights and patents. Thus, they might sell new release movies, dvds etc. over the Internet. That sanction might lead to real compliance by feds.

[groo]

My understanding of what is likely to happen when the WTO finds against the US is somewhat different. When this happens the WTO is likely to grant Antigua the legal right to ignore copyrights held by US companies. Whether these are Software, music or other types of copyrights, it will greatly upset many large companies, who should then be suddenly fighting this battle with us.

[metsandfinsfan]

that would be awesome

[meleader2]

[ QUOTE ]
My understanding of what is likely to happen when the WTO finds against the US is somewhat different. When this happens the WTO is likely to grant Antigua the legal right to ignore copyrights held by US companies. Whether these are Software, music or other types of copyrights, it will greatly upset many large companies, who should then be suddenly fighting this battle with us.

[/ QUOTE ]

remember though, the issue with all these is then getting the word out that these Disney, Miramax, etc. products ARE in Antigua and available to the US. The US won't let Antigua run commercials, so it'll be word of mouth, unless I'm mistaken.

It will not only be in the form of the physical product (aka the DVD or a Goofy doll) but most likely massive server farms for bitTorrents.

Any thoughts on if i'm wrong here? I'd like to see the WTO setting these servers up for Antigua too. I'd gladly click every single advertisement on their site each time i searched for a movie/song off their server.

[redbeard]

i think groo is correct here. this would really be devistating to our entertainment industry and force them to deal with the issue. they are definately powerful enough to get the congress to write new laws to reverse this year's legislation -- especially if it is a democratically held congress. the only concern we would have with this would be if the u.s. congress decided to cut out its loopholes for online lotteries and horse racing; thereby putting the u.s. in compliance with the w.t.o. by opposing ALL online gambling on moral grounds. currently those carve outs are the things that makes the u.s. case hypocritical and inconsistant in the eyes of the w.t.o.

[RGL]

I believe I saw previously on this board that the U.S. had been threatened with copyright and patent sanctions once before by the WTO and immediately changed policy to conform to the ruling. My understanding is that they could offer physical copies of the previous product, downloads, or any other method of distribution. The copyrights or patents wouldn't apply any longer. Of course, copies are available not, illegally, in Hong Kong and Asian markets for $.10 or so on the dollar. The difference is that Antigua and other parties would be free to market and distribute the products directly to U.S. and worldwide markets.

[IndyFish]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe I saw previously on this board that the U.S. had been threatened with copyright and patent sanctions once before by the WTO and immediately changed policy to conform to the ruling. My understanding is that they could offer physical copies of the previous product, downloads, or any other method of distribution. The copyrights or patents wouldn't apply any longer. Of course, copies are available not, illegally, in Hong Kong and Asian markets for $.10 or so on the dollar. The difference is that Antigua and other parties would be free to market and distribute the products directly to U.S. and worldwide markets.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is my understanding as well. The copyright issue is really our only hope, since Antigua really doesn't even remotely matter to US trade policy. I doubt the EU will join the Antigua complaint, but according to the lawyer in the article, both the EU and Japan are voicing their opposition to the US ban.

[MiltonFriedman]

With all due respect, you clearly do not know anything about Antigua. They cannot and will not raise tariffs, it would be political suicide internally there.

[MiltonFriedman]

Antigua already ignores copyrights. The national television station there directly lifts programming from HBO and Showtime for free television braodcast. No one cares because there are only 60,000 people on the islands.

[BluffTHIS!]

Milton,

That specific copyright violation doesn't matter for the reason you gave. But *if* the WTO did give them formal permission to ignore copyright laws wrt the US, then as was opined above, they might allow Antiguan companies to pirate and market to other countries, such US copyrighted materials. Of course that is a big "if", and also assumes 3rd countries would give the WTO ruling the same interpretation as Antigua did, and allow such pirated imports. Another big "if". The only thing that argues for the WTO allowing such a drastic sanction is that it is the only type by which a small nation like Antigua can implement any meaningful retaliation against bigger nations.

[tangled]

[ QUOTE ]
i think groo is correct here. this would really be devistating to our entertainment industry and force them to deal with the issue. they are definately powerful enough to get the congress to write new laws to reverse this year's legislation -- especially if it is a democratically
held congress. the only concern we would have with this would be if the u.s. congress decided to cut out its loopholes for online lotteries and horse racing; thereby putting the u.s. in compliance with the w.t.o. by opposing ALL online gambling on moral grounds. currently those carve outs are the things that makes the u.s. case hypocritical and inconsistant in the eyes of the w.t.o.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an interesting point I was wondering about. If the US did ban all forms of online gaming in response to the WTO decisions, then would that automatically mean that Antigua would lose its case? Yes, the inconsistency in US law would be erased, but that still wouldn't show that the US is really morally opposed to online gaming,thus allowing the US the moral exemption it seeks. Because a thirteen-year old throws away his Playboys just before his mother cleans his room, doesn't mean that he has suddenly developed an aversion to naked women. Because the US Govt. suddenly stops all forms of govt.tolerance of online gaming,because it fears WTO sanctions, doesn't mean that the people are morally opposed to gambling.
Not only that, but there are hundreds of casino's tolerated on US soil. I know that there is a difference between internet gaming and traditional B&M gaming, but not morally. An activity such as this doesn't become immoral only when it is done on the internet.

It seems to me that the US is in a tough spot. But I don't know since I'm not an expert on international trade laws.

As to the whether the US has anything to fear from Antigua because of its small size: Again, I don't know, but even if that is true, what about the indirect fallout the US might experience if it fails to comply with the WTO. How can the US be the leader of the free world when it is outside the laws it has helped to create? Won't the US lose its "moral" high ground?

[MiltonFriedman]

I think I'll start with the Zoo's copyrighted pattern mapping software.

That's because it has the same underlying realism as the scenarios of Antiguans muscling the US on their own.

[DeliciousBass]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i think groo is correct here. this would really be devistating to our entertainment industry and force them to deal with the issue. they are definately powerful enough to get the congress to write new laws to reverse this year's legislation -- especially if it is a democratically
held congress. the only concern we would have with this would be if the u.s. congress decided to cut out its loopholes for online lotteries and horse racing; thereby putting the u.s. in compliance with the w.t.o. by opposing ALL online gambling on moral grounds. currently those carve outs are the things that makes the u.s. case hypocritical and inconsistant in the eyes of the w.t.o.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an interesting point I was wondering about. If the US did ban all forms of online gaming in response to the WTO decisions, then would that automatically mean that Antigua would lose its case? Yes, the inconsistency in US law would be erased, but that still wouldn't show that the US is really morally opposed to online gaming,thus allowing the US the moral exemption it seeks. Because a thirteen-year old throws away his Playboys just before his mother cleans his room, doesn't mean that he has suddenly developed an aversion to naked women. Because the US Govt. suddenly stops all forms of govt.tolerance of online gaming,because it fears WTO sanctions, doesn't mean that the people are morally opposed to gambling.
Not only that, but there are hundreds of casino's tolerated on US soil. I know that there is a difference between internet gaming and traditional B&M gaming, but not morally. An activity such as this doesn't become immoral only when it is done on the internet.

It seems to me that the US is in a tough spot. But I don't know since I'm not an expert on international trade laws.

As to the whether the US has anything to fear from Antigua because of its small size: Again, I don't know, but even if that is true, what about the indirect fallout the US might experience if it fails to comply with the WTO. How can the US be the leader of the free world when it is outside the laws it has helped to create? Won't the US lose its "moral" high ground?

[/ QUOTE ]

No...

The inconstistency in the US law (banning online gambling) stems from the fact that they allow B&M gambling and promote state-sponsored gambling (lotteries).

That was the point that Antigua made in the orginal hearings and the one the court ruled on. In order for the US to win this upcoming hearing they would need to ban all forms of gambling on US soil...removing the carve-outs would have zero effect on their failure to come in to compliance.

Edited to say I use "they" and "their" when I suppose I should use "we" and "our"...carry on.

[tangled]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i think groo is correct here. this would really be devistating to our entertainment industry and force them to deal with the issue. they are definately powerful enough to get the congress to write new laws to reverse this year's legislation -- especially if it is a democratically
held congress. the only concern we would have with this would be if the u.s. congress decided to cut out its loopholes for online lotteries and horse racing; thereby putting the u.s. in compliance with the w.t.o. by opposing ALL online gambling on moral grounds. currently those carve outs are the things that makes the u.s. case hypocritical and inconsistant in the eyes of the w.t.o.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an interesting point I was wondering about. If the US did ban all forms of online gaming in response to the WTO decisions, then would that automatically mean that Antigua would lose its case? Yes, the inconsistency in US law would be erased, but that still wouldn't show that the US is really morally opposed to online gaming,thus allowing the US the moral exemption it seeks. Because a thirteen-year old throws away his Playboys just before his mother cleans his room, doesn't mean that he has suddenly developed an aversion to naked women. Because the US Govt. suddenly stops all forms of govt.tolerance of online gaming,because it fears WTO sanctions, doesn't mean that the people are morally opposed to gambling.
Not only that, but there are hundreds of casino's tolerated on US soil. I know that there is a difference between internet gaming and traditional B&M gaming, but not morally. An activity such as this doesn't become immoral only when it is done on the internet.

It seems to me that the US is in a tough spot. But I don't know since I'm not an expert on international trade laws.

As to the whether the US has anything to fear from Antigua because of its small size: Again, I don't know, but even if that is true, what about the indirect fallout the US might experience if it fails to comply with the WTO. How can the US be the leader of the free world when it is outside the laws it has helped to create? Won't the US lose its "moral" high ground?

[/ QUOTE ]

No...

The inconstistency in the US law (banning online gambling) stems from the fact that they allow B&M gambling and promote state-sponsored gambling (lotteries).

That was the point that Antigua made in the orginal hearings and the one the court ruled on. In order for the US to win this upcoming hearing they would need to ban all forms of gambling on US soil...removing the carve-outs would have zero effect on their failure to come in to compliance.

Edited to say I use "they" and "their" when I suppose I should use "we" and "our"...carry on.

[/ QUOTE ]

did you read my second paragraph?-"Not only that..."

[ASD99]

it will be very interesting to see how this all works out. Most importantly when the 180 days are up and we actually see what kind of regs are put into action and if these will actually affect our game a substantial amount or not.

[Richas]

[ QUOTE ]
This doesn't chage your point, but it would aid your credibility in arguments.

Antigua can NOT raise tariffs on goods imported from the US. That is insane to expect.

Also, do NOT expect the Brits to jump on the bandwagon here. They have their own agenda and issues and are fleeing the US market. The recent "meeting" in London this week was a complete disaster. The result were press reports slamming online gaming as money-laundering.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the EU can and will enjoy putting on tariffs plus Antigua can ask for the sanctions it wants. A WTO ruling is like Christmas for home town protectionists anything you don't want/like you can slap tariffs on in punishment.

The London meeting was far from a disaster. Look (as the minister said) there are three options with Internet gambling. You can let the market rip and face sites promoting to kids, problem gamblers and doing it all from tax havens without public accounts or you can introduce prohibition in which case you get mafia.com, colombiandrugbaronsrus.com and jihad.com running the show because they don't mind breaking the law (ok with some competition from more respectable lawbreakers) or you can regulate so that sites can't deal with kids, have to put protections in place for problem gamblers, have to be audited, have to hold punters money in segregated accounts, have the same money laundering reporting requirements as banks and pay taxes.

The headlines were about the results of PROHIBITION not REGULATION. If you want to win the battle in the US you have to be able to put the case for regulation and sometimes that means talking about STOPPING money laundering.

[SlapPappy]

I am sure the U.S. is losing sleep over Antigua raising tariffs on them. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[5thStreetHog]

[ QUOTE ]
I am sure the U.S. is losing sleep over Antigua raising tariffs on them. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[/ QUOTE ]This current group has not lost sleep over alienating the entire world,over much more important things from enviremental issues to war.So i agree,hard to believe any action against them regarding this issue will change that.

[Richas]

[ QUOTE ]
I am sure the U.S. is losing sleep over Antigua raising tariffs on them. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I am sure your far seeing legislators have worked this all out along with all the consequences of this well considered and long debated legislation. Now do me a favour, bookmark this post and diary coming back to it in three years time. I'm not 100% sure whether the EU will want to rush things though to mess with the 2008 election or wait till after, I guess it depends whose running but they will enjoy beating the US up on this sometime soon (in political terms).