UIGEA - WTO - and the RULES.......

[oldbookguy]

Much has been written concerning the UIGEA and regulations.

Since I have read many very knowledgeable people read and post here (hopefully at least one has someone’s ear) there are a few aspects of the UIGEA now in play that may or may not be a consideration.

1. Since the WTO ruling and the U. S. agreeing it is correct and we are going to withdraw from that section does that not make poker legal under the WTO ruling until such time as that occurs.

2. If number 1 is a correct assessment, the should not the UIGEA rules then in some fashion regulate that which is legal under the WTO ruling and bar that which is not such as sports betting since the U. S. never agreed to that section.

3. The most important and I know it has been beaten to death, but ‘skill’ games are not banned. Games played on and at sites based in the U. S. like those on MSN, AOL, Yahoo and others. These legal skill games include solitaire, backgammon, hearts, spades, children’s video games, puzzle games and more. All considered ‘skill’ games.

4. In light of number 3 above has any consideration been given that the ‘trouble’ adopting rules centers on if poker is no less a game of skill than solitaire and the others or are those games really skill and poker luck?

5. Since the UIGEA bans transferring money TO offshore sites but not those located in foreign countries to play here online (so long as it is not offered here except under strict limits) and in light of the U. S. position on the UIGEA what effect on the rules will this have concerning U. S. company’s invasion into the E. U. gaming market while a reverse block is in place.
Yahoo, an American company has already launched Yahoo.UK Poker, Churchill Downs is looking to get into the gaming business, Harrah’s is launching and I have read the Mirage is planning on the same. All banned in the U. S. but being offered in the U.K. and E.U. where it is legal.

Anyway, sorry kinda long for the first post here, this will be reposted at a few other places as I am seeking responses for a possible new front we poker players can fight.

[Skallagrim]

Hello oldbookguy, welcome to 2+2. You will find a lot more intelligent discussion here than you have at the cardplayer forum. Of course you will find a lot of less than intelligent discussion too /images/graemlins/wink.gif .

You ask some serious questions, I'll do my best to reply:

1) No, the WTO ruling involves trade agreements and sanctions and would not be a defense TO AN AMERICAN POKER PLAYER. Off-shore sites my use this as a defense (I believe Carruthers is, anyway) in that they can say "hey even if we are breaking your law, you gave us treaty rights to do this."
But if you are in the US, this wont help in the same way.

2) the WTO decision does not depend on the type of "gambling" at least as it stands presently. The WTO said the US could not ban foreign remote gambling on "morals" grounds while allowing domestic remote gambling. Individual types of gambling were not part of this decision as far as I can tell. But that leaves open the possibility of the US changing the law to allow some types of Internet gambling (both foregn and domestic) and barring other types. Since that is not the current US law, it was not specifically ruled on by the WTO (I think, Jay Cohen will correct me if I am wrong).

3) is not a question, but of course Poker is a skill game /images/graemlins/smile.gif .

4) One real headache for those drafting UIGEA regulations is that the only thing banned everywhere is sportsbetting (by federal law - the Wire Act). Every other bit of "unlawful gambling" has to be determined by state law. So, the regulations must/should be written so that if internet poker is not illegal in, say, California, but is illegal in Ohio, then the banks should allow transfers from Cali but not from Ohio. And since most states laws say nothing specific about poker, how can the federal DOJ predict whether a state court will rule poker a gambling game or a skill game? They cant.

5) this is where the WTO bit does get juicy, and this is precisely what will lead the EU and/or the UK to seek sanctions from the US (following Antigua's lead) when the US withdraws from the GATTS agreement, if the US is even allowed to withdraw. The prospect of the US government having to give very large amounts of money to foreign countries to preserve our current gambling laws is very likely. So the politicians will have to change the laws, one way or another.

Skallagrim

[oldbookguy]

Thanks Skallagrim, those notes will be added to the document being worked on and shared and certainly some will find their way into a final draft.

One thing we all have been going nuts over, the actual rules have not been finalized so really we do not know where poker is going to fit in if at all.

Part of the position being developed does center around the Yahoo, MSN and other games.

From the TOS on MSN "The rules governing sweepstakes, contests and tournaments with entry fees and/or prizes are established by individual states, not the federal government. If you reside in any of the following states, you cannot participate in fee-based tournaments with prizes: Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, or any other jurisdiction in which participation in the games and tournaments offered on this Site is restricted by law. VOID WHERE PROHIBITED OR RESTRICTED BY LAW." and this is where hopefully the argument will center, not with the federal government, but states IF we can get poker included with the following games"
http://zone.msn.com/en/root/gamebrowser.htm?playmode=4&genre=0

obg