Keeping in mind that the following is based on only a fuzzy understanding of the details which usually stops me from piping in.
There seems to be four reasons mentioned why the internet bill should not be a major cause for concern (difficulty in enforcement, not applicable to poker sites, WTO, eventual carving out of poker from casino gambling). Plus there is the 270 day window.
Because of the above and maybe other reasons, most sites are doing business as usual.
Some here though point to Party's pulling out as evidence that the reasons for optimism are not as strong as we think. Else why would they do it? Especially before the 270 days.
My guess is that it is not really for legal reasons nor due to the fact that they don't want to go to jail. My guess is that as a British public company that feel it is important to maintain, shall we say, their DIGNITY. Perhaps not the perfect word but close enough.
The fact that they can get away with continuing to serve Americans for 270 days or maybe indefinitely doesn't matter. The fact that the WTO may quickly change things or that poker sites may be ruled an exception doesn't matter. What I believe matters to them is the fact that flawed or not, the bills passage seems to say that most US Congressman don't want them offfering their services to the US. Not only don't they want it, they THINK they have expressed that in their vote. And for a British public company that is good enough. At least for now.
If my take is right that is of course good news for poker players. Because it means that Party's caving doesn't necessarily show that the other sites are showing merely wishful thinking by hanging around. The dignity issue doesn't apply to them. If the law is unworkable, immoral or shouldn't apply to poker those are all good reasons for most sites to carry on.
Post Extras
Entire topic
Subject
Posted by
Posted on
My Opinion About The Signifigance of Party's Decision