Punitve damages and the WTO

[tangled]

The WTO has ruled that the US is out of compliance with international trade agreements concerning its approach to online gaming. The passing of UIGEA will be used by Antigua to show that the US is still out of compliance. Like the WSEX CEO has said, the UIGEA will turn a 'home run into a grand slam'. I think for the most part this summarizes the situation that exists with online gambling in the US and the WTO. Right?

My question: Is there a mechanism in the WTO charter that allows them to assess punitive damages on the US. Can the WTO say that the US is flouting the rulings of the WTO with the passage of the UIGEA, the celebratory attitude of members of congress - like Frist himself when he gleefully pointed out that Party Gaming stock had lost most of it value after the passage of the UIGEA, the arrests of the former NETELLER execs, the issuing of subpeonas to overseas financial institutions by the DOJ, etc..

I doubt it but was wondering

[fish2plus2]

My thoughts on this is that if the USA doesnt listen to the United Nations when it comes to invading other countries and starting wars, I doubt they are going to listen to the WTO.

Hillary 2008.

[JPFisher55]

I don't think the term punitive damages applies to WTO. However, the WTO might decide not to permit the US to prosecute any cases against other countries. In addition, it can allow Antiqua, and maybe other countries, to apply sanctions to US for non-compliance. Sanctions might include the right to ignore US copyright and patent laws.

[BadBoyBenny]

This article (http://www.slate.com/id/2153352/) elaborates on Antigua's possible options.

[Little_Luck]

That article points out a good idea. Unfortunately, we have missiles. Even easier, we probably account for more than 50 percent of their tourism. Granted, free reign of US patents would be worth quite a lot. In conclusion, we have missiles.

[Colonel Kataffy]

One thing that people miss is it is likely that the U.S. could bring itself into compliance with the WTO ruling without making internet poker legal. Antigua isn't really being subjected to discriminatory trade practices because a firm in the U.S. isn't able to open up an online poker room either.

Where the WTO could come into play is a few years down the road when internet gambling is legalized and licensed for a few specific companys. Then Antigua will have a good argument that they should get to compete too.

[duck_butter]

[ QUOTE ]
Hillary 2008.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is she going to legalize online poker?

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think the term punitive damages applies to WTO. However, the WTO might decide not to permit the US to prosecute any cases against other countries. In addition, it can allow Antiqua, and maybe other countries, to apply sanctions to US for non-compliance. Sanctions might include the right to ignore US copyright and patent laws.

[/ QUOTE ]

Antigua has specifically stated that ignoring copyright laws is not an option they will pursue...

[Jack Bando]

[ QUOTE ]
One thing that people miss is it is likely that the U.S. could bring itself into compliance with the WTO ruling without making internet poker legal. Antigua isn't really being subjected to discriminatory trade practices because a firm in the U.S. isn't able to open up an online poker room either.

Where the WTO could come into play is a few years down the road when internet gambling is legalized and licensed for a few specific companys. Then Antigua will have a good argument that they should get to compete too.

[/ QUOTE ]

You could argue discriminatory on grounds of LV,CA, and Atlantic City. Gambling's okay there, but foriegn companies on the internet aren't.

[Anders]

[ QUOTE ]
My thoughts on this is that if the USA doesnt listen to the United Nations when it comes to invading other countries and starting wars, I doubt they are going to listen to the WTO.

Hillary 2008.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only thing Hillary will do that relates to online gambling at all is possibly pushing for censorship of online games in general.

[RGL]

IMO, the call-outs for horse racing, lotteries, fantasy football for online legitimacy also strengthen the WTO action.

[olivert]

The WTO ruling regarding the U.S. applies to online betting of HORSE RACING ONLY.

The ruling actually affirms the Wire Act.

The WTO ruling does NOT apply to online poker. Never has. Never will.

http://www.gambling-law-us.com/Articles-Notes/Fox-UIGEA.htm

[JPFisher55]

Mr. Fox is wrong. The ruling states that the US can outlaw all internet and remote gaming, but not some. If the US made all remote gambling unlawful then it would have a defense under the moral clause. But the horse racing exemption to the Wire Act means that the US defense under the moral clause fails and the Wire Act and related laws to violate the WTO.
See http://www.antiguawto.com/

[JPFisher55]

I am going to amend my previous post. The WTO did rule that these the Wire Act and related statutes violate the WTO, in large part, because the horse racing exception did not seem to apply to foreign companies. However, they were not clear if horse racing exception was just one example of discrimination. It seems that the appellate body did not review other potential examples due to procedural issues.
It is not clear if permitting foreign off-track horse racing betting would bring the US into compliance. Since some states now have remote lottery betting, more issues need to be reviewed. Confusion exists about this ruling.
However, US has done nothing to comply with the WTO ruling. Also, the current WTO ruling may affect the court cases against Mr. Carruthers and the Neteller founders.