[NCAces]

[ QUOTE ]
What you say is true, obviously getting those releases changed only really benefits people like themselves, and the few in the future who are lucky enough to get in a similar position. But on the off chance that you or I are ever in that position, I'm sure you wouldn't want them to have the right to sell your name to promote products you don't want to promote, for example.

[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I think this is going to be your toughest claim to prove ... that in your market there aren't ample other opportunities for you to earn your living doing what you do.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the counter argument to that would be that it's not that they can't earn a living playing poker, it's that the WPT's agreements with casinos limit the opportunies for competing televised events - which doesn't really have anything to do with Greg and co. being able to make money from playing poker outside of the WPT.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good comments ... for my own edification, I went to Wikipedia ... Anti-trust: A business with a monopoly over certain products or services may be in violation of antitrust laws if it has abused its dominant position or market power.

One of the problems that I see with their lawsuit is the definition of the market. I think that is why alot of us originally state, "it isn't like there aren't other options." This is obviously something they know they have to deal with - Greg has a canned response to it, as he should. They know this will be brought up. They are trying to very narrowly define the market ... big buy-in poker tournaments that are televised. I think the judge is going to question this greatly when (1) there are tons of other, non-televised tournaments that they can play in every day, and (2) there are a number of other big buy-in poker tournaments that are televised and open to the public that they can enter. Just because they have to sit out of the 17 WPT events, they have somewhere around 50 WSOP events, including Circuit Events. In other words, WPT will easily be able to show that the Plaintiffs have at least 3 times more big buy-in, televised events than the WPT offers. Most might come in a 45 day period, but who cares?

I would also point out that I don't think they are going to be able to show that because 17 Casinos and sister properties can't have other televised tournaments that they are in some way damaged. The Trump properties alone would enable the "Platiniffs 7" to hold their own televised tournaments. With all the card rooms in CA that aren't tied down, not to mention the international casinos, anyone who had a good business plan right now could start televised tournaments. There are just too many places in Vegas and elsewhere that aren't tied down due to these agreements.

I think that the WPT should amend their over-reaching agreement. And that is exactly what the Plaintiffs are trying to do ... exert pressure that will result in a settlement. But, I think they have a tough row to hoe.

NCAces