Legal Question (Sites like Doyles etc)

[Ron-Mexico]

So, if Doyle's site for example DID NOT accept US players, would that be 'legal' for Doyle's room to exsist in the USA? promote, get paid for etc?

The question I guess is, could someone live in the USA and profit \ claim taxes \ legally if they banned US Players?

Doyle would then be ok?

[Red Lion]

Somehow I dont think so. Look in the affiliate/rakeback forum for the "online gambling and the law" links morgant posted.

[Ron-Mexico]

I thought harrahs or mgm or whatever tried to do this, but just couldnt make enough money.

[redbeard]

i had heard that too ron. in fact, i think in the 60minutes piece on online gambling from last year the ceo of mgm mentioned that they had a site (although it may have been based in the caribbean) and couldn't compete with the established sites.

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
So, if Doyle's site for example DID NOT accept US players, would that be 'legal' for Doyle's room to exsist in the USA? promote, get paid for etc?

The question I guess is, could someone live in the USA and profit \ claim taxes \ legally if they banned US Players?

Doyle would then be ok?

[/ QUOTE ]
A U.S.-based poker site that caters to overseas players would more clearly violate the law than the foreign-based sites that cater to U.S. players. The operator would be running an unlicensed game for profit and AFAIK that's a big no-no in every U.S. state, district, and territory. Once that violation was established the UIGEA would then apply to deposits from anywhere in the world.

Overseas sites that serve overseas players violate no U.S. law that I am aware of. Really it should not be any different than a legal overseas B&M. U.S. citizens and residents are free to own them or work for them.

[MiltonFriedman]

As long as we are leaping to conclusions*, I would leap to the opposite one, Stellar. (*I have not researched the issue and this is not a legal opinion) :

I really disagree with your basic premise. Take Nevada for example. Where does it say anywhere that someone could not operate a poker site which takes play only from overseas ? (Keep in mind that NO games would be exposed for play to Nevadans, or anyone else from the US.)

Why wouldn't a simple business license suffice, it would not be gaming IN Nevada or the US. What if the US based company was also "licensed" in Kahnawake or Antigua ? MGM gave up its licensed foreign online gaming because of its Nevada licensed gaming operations. There would be none under these circumstances.

What Federal law would prohibit it ? Clearly, no other State laws would apply.

The issue is NOT clear at all and it is a mistake to leap to conclusions on either side.

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]

I really disagree with your basic premise. Take Nevada for example. Where does it say anywhere that someone could not operate a poker site which takes play only from overseas ?

The issue is NOT clear at all

[/ QUOTE ]

made clear by 465.093, misdemeanor (http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-465.html#NRS465Sec093)

[MiltonFriedman]

Okay, good find ... one down (Nevada) and 49 to go, plus the USVI.

(It looks clear that the poker game server could not be in Nevada, but what if the game server were licensed by and located in Kahnawake, so no gaming information is transmitted from/to within Nevada).

Remember, the issue is whether the State-based site can offer play ONLY to non-US players. To make it easy, assume the site DOES want to locate its game server in State X legally.

[MagCFO]

If you operate an online gaming site that does not accept wagers from US Players, the US will not do anything to you.

The US can not impose it's laws on someone who does nothing illegal inside the US.

If a US citizen owned a bar in Amsterdam that sold pot, the US couldn't arrest that person for selling drugs.

There are all kinds of people living in the US that participate in foreign businesses that would not be legal in the US.

[MayorHerb]

You put gaming servers in the U.S., and the feds would be on the hunt.

Unless a state specifically passes a pro-online gaming law, I think the U.S. AG will impound any U.S. based online gaming site that doesn't "play nice", either by jumping through hoops (contest based, membership based like Gamesville or BetZip) or run BY a state.

On Edit: NO MATTER who the site caters to, within the U.S. or excluding the U.S.

Even then... The U.S. and State may find themselves at odds, no pun intended.

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, good find ... one down (Nevada) and 49 to go, plus the USVI.

(It looks clear that the poker game server could not be in Nevada, but what if the game server were licensed by and located in Kahnawake, so no gaming information is transmitted from/to within Nevada).

Remember, the issue is whether the State-based site can offer play ONLY to non-US players. To make it easy, assume the site DOES want to locate its game server in State X legally.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have serious doubts a poker site would 'want' to do this and very serious doubts that they could then find a State X. There are likely Federal problems, too. Can't see any advantage to your plan.

[MiltonFriedman]

It's not my plan, It's not even my thread.

For the record however, FullTilt did it for years, as did PStars. Both had management based in the US and FT even operated servers, other than game servers, from the US. So, there must be some advantages.