iMEGA Gets Response from US

[eddytom]

Casino Gambling Web has just released an article on the latest news from the iMEGA case. I read on this forum the other day someone asking if there was an update on this case, couldn't find where it was though so just started a new topic... Anyway...

[ QUOTE ]
Today, Casino Gambling Web came across the USDJ's written response and the arguments are much the same as they were in their initial filing for a dismissal.




The new documents state that the members in iMEGA's suit have not been harmed specifically by the passing of the UIGEA. They also state that the iMEGA members, if they are breaking laws presented in the UIGEA, are not acts of free speech, but rather acts of conduct that may or may not be pursued by prosecution. The USDJ also states that no member is currently being prosecuted, as well there is no reason to fear prosecution, therefore iMEGA has no grounds to further pursue a TRO against the UIGEA.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a great deal more to the response than that, below is the pdf file from CGW of the complete filing by the US. This pdf file is only 18 pages long and much more readable than the last one they filed that was 46 pages long.

PDF File of Full US Response (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/us-response-to-imega.pdf)

CGW Article on US' Response (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gambling-news/gambling-law/us_responds_to_imega_in_online_gambling_legal_suit _46974.html)

[Coy_Roy]

[ QUOTE ]
there is no reason to fear prosecution

[/ QUOTE ]

Orly?

[BluffTHIS!]

Dude,

Quit shilling for CGW and get lost. Here is the thread I started a week ago with the exact same info: iMEGA on standing & ripeness (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=12032999&an=0&page=1#Pos t12032999). And no one needs to download that PDF from CGW as they just took it off the iMEGA or G911 sites, and posters can just go to that directly.

[eddytom]

Bluff, this is updated information, chill out and stop bashing everything I say when you don't know what your talking about. G911 and iMEGA do not have this information posted yet because it is brand new.

[Uglyowl]

Chill out Bluff, why are you so hostile. This is new information and harmless.

[JPFisher55]

I read the government's reply. I don't think it adds anything. However, I am still skeptical about the standing of iMEGA to bring this litigation because I have no idea who or what entities are members of the iMEGA.

[CompatiblePoker]

iMEGA sends out early press to news sites via email before they upload the .pdf's or write news stories on imega.org. They uploaded the originals today.

Sept. 21 .pdf brief (http://www.imega.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/us-response-to-imega.pdf)
Sept. 23 News Story from Imega (http://www.imega.org/2007/09/23/igaming-law-challenge-govt-responds-to-imegas-tro-request/)

[Legislurker]

So.............what happens Wednesday? iMega gets tossed out?
TRO issued? Continuance? If the 26th is the actual hearing date, Im not sure who keeps what website up to date any more.

Also, G911 wrote in something about a prominent 1st Amendment lawyer joining the case. Is it spin or is Eric M. Bernstein, Esq., someone with cache?

[HelloandGoodby90]

From Gambling911.com:

Countdown to Court Ruling on Internet Gambling
September 26 (this coming Wednesday) is an important date for anyone involved in online gambling, whether an operator or player. This is the day that a US Court in New Jersey will decide what to do in regard to a challenge against the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. The UIGEA essentially makes banks responsible for enforcing policies that would prevent Internet gambling via money transactions.

Pushing its time right down to the limit, the US Department of Justice, on the behalf of the other two defendants (Federal Trade Commission and Federal Reserve) just made the deadline of Sept. 21st that was set by Hon. Judge Mary L. Cooper (3rd District/Trenton division) for submitting a response brief, addressing the request by iMEGA's legal team for a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIEGA), as part of our suit to have that law overturned and declared unconstitutional.

The brief opposing the TRO request essentially repeats the defendants' arguments in their motion to dismiss our suit (iMEGA v Gonzales, et al), on the grounds that iMEGA lacks sufficient standing to bring its complaint, and that - even if that were not the case - that the law is (in their opinion) "unripe" for challenge, due to the government's missing the deadline of 270 days from the signing of the law (Oct. 13, 2006) to provide the necessary regulations for enforcing the law. This amounts to the government trying to have it both ways - insisting that the law cannot be challenged due to its failure to meet the requirements of the law.

Regardless of what decision comes into play on Wednesday, either side is likely to appeal, thus buying time for the burgeoning industry. A decision initially favoring the US government stance won't stop the banking sector from enforcing UIGEA however.

Most industry experts believe that the Honorable Judge Cooper will request a period between 30 and 60 days for both sides to gather additional information supporting their case.

The industry has also begun to take notice of iMEGA's efforts - www.imega.org (http://www.imega.org) - regularly reporting on news coming out of the iMEGA camp. With the revelations that iMEGA will now be utilizing the services of Ogilvy PR, skeptics realize this Internet trade organization is for real."

"The one thing a lot of people questioned was why we were not using a Washington based law firm to represent us," said Joe Brennan, Jr., founder of iMEGA.org. "The simple answer is that none would touch a case involving online gambling."

Instead, iMEGA is having representation from one of the foremost First Amendment attorneys in the US, Eric M. Bernstein, Esq.

[Legislurker]

[ QUOTE ]
From Gambling911.com:

Countdown to Court Ruling on Internet Gambling
September 26 (this coming Wednesday) is an important date for anyone involved in online gambling, whether an operator or player. This is the day that a US Court in New Jersey will decide what to do in regard to a challenge against the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. The UIGEA essentially makes banks responsible for enforcing policies that would prevent Internet gambling via money transactions.

Pushing its time right down to the limit, the US Department of Justice, on the behalf of the other two defendants (Federal Trade Commission and Federal Reserve) just made the deadline of Sept. 21st that was set by Hon. Judge Mary L. Cooper (3rd District/Trenton division) for submitting a response brief, addressing the request by iMEGA's legal team for a temporary restraining order (TRO) against the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIEGA), as part of our suit to have that law overturned and declared unconstitutional.

The brief opposing the TRO request essentially repeats the defendants' arguments in their motion to dismiss our suit (iMEGA v Gonzales, et al), on the grounds that iMEGA lacks sufficient standing to bring its complaint, and that - even if that were not the case - that the law is (in their opinion) "unripe" for challenge, due to the government's missing the deadline of 270 days from the signing of the law (Oct. 13, 2006) to provide the necessary regulations for enforcing the law. This amounts to the government trying to have it both ways - insisting that the law cannot be challenged due to its failure to meet the requirements of the law.

Regardless of what decision comes into play on Wednesday, either side is likely to appeal, thus buying time for the burgeoning industry. A decision initially favoring the US government stance won't stop the banking sector from enforcing UIGEA however.

Most industry experts believe that the Honorable Judge Cooper will request a period between 30 and 60 days for both sides to gather additional information supporting their case.

The industry has also begun to take notice of iMEGA's efforts - www.imega.org (http://www.imega.org) - regularly reporting on news coming out of the iMEGA camp. With the revelations that iMEGA will now be utilizing the services of Ogilvy PR, skeptics realize this Internet trade organization is for real."

"The one thing a lot of people questioned was why we were not using a Washington based law firm to represent us," said Joe Brennan, Jr., founder of iMEGA.org. "The simple answer is that none would touch a case involving online gambling."

Instead, iMEGA is having representation from one of the foremost First Amendment attorneys in the US, Eric M. Bernstein, Esq.

[/ QUOTE ]

If G911's opinions or articles had merit, Id not bother to ask the question here.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
iMEGA will now be utilizing the services of Ogilvy PR

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting...........


D$D

[HelloandGoodby90]

I did a bit of investigating.

A. Bernstein has always been on the case, he did not "just' join. He has been the lawyer since the suit was filed.

B. His bio from his website:

Eric Martin Bernstein, Esq.
Principal

Practice Areas:
- Labor Law
- Employment Law
- Municipal Law
- Government Law
- Education Law
- Internet Law / First Amendment Law

Biography
With 25 years of experience, Mr. Bernstein handles matters on a wide range of subjects within the labor / employment law fields, including general advice and assistance, contract negotiations, interest and grievance arbitrations, fact-finding and mediation, disciplinary matters involving public safety and non-public safety employees.

As a municipal attorney, Mr. Bernstein has handled such diverse issues as land use matters, ethics issues, municipal construction, local public contracts law issues, tax appeals, open space acquisition and government affairs. And as a board of education attorney, Mr. Bernstein has handled matters of special education, teacher/student discipline and budget appeals.

In regard to First Amendment / Internet law, Mr. Bernstein is a member of the First Amendment Lawyer's Association and the Free Speech Coalition. Mr. Bernstein handles all aspects of First Amendment and Internet law, except for patent issues.

In addition to his practice, Mr. Bernstein is a regular and frequently requested speaker at state and national organizations and has been teaching for the Rutgers University Bureau of Government Research since the early 1980s. Mr. Bernstein has written articles for publication and serves as a Director of the New Jersey State Bar Association Local Government Law Section, where he was previously Vice President and Editor of its newsletter.

Education
J.D., University of Oklahoma College of Law, 1982.
M.S., Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University/Baruch College, 1985.
B.A., magna cum laude with honors, Drew University, 1979

Admissions
New Jersey Bar
District of Columbia Bar
Third Circuit (Federal) Court of Appeals
United States Supreme Court

Awards
International Trial Lawyers Award, University of Oklahoma College of Law, Who's Who in American Law, Who's Who in the United States and Who's Who in the World.

Service
Mr. Bernstein is counsel and a member of the Board of Directors to Kids Bridge, a children's museum/cultural center in Trenton and is also active in the Valerie Fund, a children's cancer fund.


C. Apparently, he is a big time lawyer for the porn industry. He has a website which offers legal advice to porn webmasters, which by my guess helps bring him business. Also, he was in some sort of scandal a few years ago. Info follows:

The lawyer, Eric M. Bernstein, has been fired from public jobs around the state because he admitted billing taxpayers for work while at the same time advocating legal services for porn sites. Bernstein’s firm, Eric M. Bernstein and Associates has long earned money from the porn industry, while Bernstein himself moderates chat.ynotmasters.com, a website dispensing free legal advice to pornographers. Chat.ynotmasters.com is billed as the ultimate adult webmaster resource site, and is a one-stop-shop for peddlers of the online hardcore pornography industry.

McGettigan demands action and answers to the following:

Mr. Bernstein claims he’s been up-front with prospective clients about his porn interests. If so, with whom was he up-front here in Atlantic County? Why would the Levinson Administration hire him if they knew this information?

Did Mr. Bernstein bill Atlantic County taxpayers for legal work while representing porn peddlers? I’m demanding a formal, public review of his bills.

Mr. Bernstein should come before the Freeholder Board and explain his representation of the porn industry. If he refuses, the Board should take immediate steps to rescind his contract.
After Neptune Township, the Borough of High Bridge, and Washington Township (Warren County) discovered Bernstein’s links to smut peddlers, they all either dismissed or refused to renew his contract. Demanding that action be taken, McGettigan said, “The public has a right to know why and how the Levinson Administration hired this porn lawyer, and whether he’s representing us on our dime, not pornographers.”

D. He appears to be a successful lawyer. Not sure if he is the first amendment protege that the G911 arcticle made him out to be.

E. He spoke at an online gambling tradeshow, in June.

[HelloandGoodby90]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
iMEGA will now be utilizing the services of Ogilvy PR

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting...........


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, Ogilvy is a big time company.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
iMEGA will now be utilizing the services of Ogilvy PR

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting...........


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, Ogilvy is a big time company.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dig deeper......

D$D

[HelloandGoodby90]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
iMEGA will now be utilizing the services of Ogilvy PR

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting...........


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, Ogilvy is a big time company.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dig deeper......

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Ogilvy represents American Express. Obviously, American Express has something to gain from the industry being unrestriced. AE may be aligning with IMEGA through Ogilvy, to get the UIGEA restrictions lifted. They are costly to enforce and credit card companies lose out on profits when the industry is restricted.

Read the following article. It appears credit card companies are lining up on our side.

Visa, Mastercard Lobbying Hard for Internet Gambling Regulations (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gambling-news/gambling-law/visa_mastercard_lobbying_hard_for_internet_gamblin g_regulations_46965.html)

[JPFisher55]

I think that the iMEGA is going to have to provide some information about their membership to have any chance to prove standing. Looks like the judge will request such info with some time to answer. I would like to know who is behind the iMEGA. I do think that they have a good lawyer. Heck the porn industry has done well in court against the DOJ. Crossing my fingers on this case, but not holding my breath.

[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
iMEGA will now be utilizing the services of Ogilvy PR

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting...........


D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, Ogilvy is a big time company.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dig deeper......

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Ogilvy represents American Express. Obviously, American Express has something to gain from the industry being unrestriced. AE may be aligning with IMEGA through Ogilvy, to get the UIGEA restrictions lifted. They are costly to enforce and credit card companies lose out on profits when the industry is restricted.

Read the following article. It appears credit card companies are lining up on our side.

Visa, Mastercard Lobbying Hard for Internet Gambling Regulations (http://www.casinogamblingweb.com/gambling-news/gambling-law/visa_mastercard_lobbying_hard_for_internet_gamblin g_regulations_46965.html)

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus do I have to spell it out?

This means there is no PPA iMEGA rift at all!!!

The A to B to C and D is much more direct than that in the poker world.

Have fun,

D$D