The heart of the matter: extradition

[New001]

[ QUOTE ]
I just want to take a minute to thank you for providing all of this information and your analyses Nate. You, Berge, and Mr. K have all been excellent posters the past x weeks/months leading up to this and all three of you deserve to be praised. All of the information you share is greatly appreciated.

[/ QUOTE ]
Seconded. I might enjoy Baseball Prospectus more, but this is so much more helpful.

Would anybody like to speculate how much it would cost for a company like Party to relocate to one of these safer areas? I imagine that if they ban US players in the short-term and then move later on, they'll lose much of their American business permanently.

[breaktwister]

Great post Nate.

I am no expert on international law, but these poker companies are legal entities carrying out legal business in many countries around the world.

Just because the US takes a dislike to it does not mean that the US law applies to these companies in any way or form. It is totally irrelevant (imo) that these companies may or may not accept US customers. The US has no power over them and its as simple as that really.

The US can only bring charges/action against entities under its control (ie its own citizens or businesses with a physical US presence).

A UK Court would laugh at an extradition request for someone who has not committed a crime punishable in UK law AND without even leaving the UK to commit said "crime".

[Silent1]

[ QUOTE ]
Great post Nate.

I am no expert on international law, but these poker companies are legal entities carrying out legal business in many countries around the world.

Just because the US takes a dislike to it does not mean that the US law applies to these companies in any way or form. It is totally irrelevant (imo) that these companies may or may not accept US customers. The US has no power over them and its as simple as that really.

The US can only bring charges/action against entities under its control (ie its own citizens or businesses with a physical US presence).

A UK Court would laugh at an extradition request for someone who has not committed a crime punishable in UK law AND without even leaving the UK to commit said "crime".

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought that was what happened with the Natwest situation. Isn't it? I don't know the details.

[dibbs]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I just want to take a minute to thank you for providing all of this information and your analyses Nate. You, Berge, and Mr. K have all been excellent posters the past x weeks/months leading up to this and all three of you deserve to be praised. All of the information you share is greatly appreciated.

[/ QUOTE ]
Seconded. I might enjoy Baseball Prospectus more, but this is so much more helpful.

Would anybody like to speculate how much it would cost for a company like Party to relocate to one of these safer areas? I imagine that if they ban US players in the short-term and then move later on, they'll lose much of their American business permanently.

[/ QUOTE ]

Although this is pure speculation, I cant imagine it would be too hard to relocate what needed to be relocated before the bills teeth take hold, making a seemless transition as obviously banning US players once will create a stigma that will definitely hurt them in the long run.

What exactly would they need to move anyways, just some offices? Servers? Will they need to set up different banks (as I think Stars and a few others use some Scottish bank which I imagine falls within extraditable territory).

Sorry if this is just rambling and incoherent, Ive been trying to absorb this stuff all day and the wine is kicking in.

[Nate tha\\\' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Great post Nate.

I am no expert on international law, but these poker companies are legal entities carrying out legal business in many countries around the world.

Just because the US takes a dislike to it does not mean that the US law applies to these companies in any way or form. It is totally irrelevant (imo) that these companies may or may not accept US customers. The US has no power over them and its as simple as that really.

The US can only bring charges/action against entities under its control (ie its own citizens or businesses with a physical US presence).

A UK Court would laugh at an extradition request for someone who has not committed a crime punishable in UK law AND without even leaving the UK to commit said "crime".

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought that was what happened with the Natwest situation. Isn't it? I don't know the details.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I'd imagine that the Natwest situation weighs large on the minds of UK-based gaming execs. Good background here.

[MLSchaff]

Iran and North Korea become offshore gaming server havens. They certainly won't be extraditing anyone to the U.S. Of course then I suppose the whole "online gambling funds terrorists" thing might begin to have a shred of validity...

[KDawg]

France is one major country that I can think of that isn't a fan of extradicting to the US. i don't know what their take is on internet gambling though

[MannyIsGod]

[ QUOTE ]
France is one major country that I can think of that isn't a fan of extradicting to the US. i don't know what their take is on internet gambling though

[/ QUOTE ]

This may be wrong, but I believe the only way France will not extradite anyone is because they may face the death penalty. however, if that is not a danger I believe they extradite fairly easily with the US.

[Vern]

[ QUOTE ]
France is one major country that I can think of that isn't a fan of extradicting to the US. i don't know what their take is on internet gambling though

[/ QUOTE ]
Online gaming would have to be illegal in France for them to be required to send anyone to the USA as part of an extradition. All the extradition treaties we sign include language that we will only extradite to other countries for offenses that are also offenses here. They put the same clause in their side. In addition, they are also able to no extradite on moral grounds if the death penalty is involved. But no country we have an extradition treaty with will send us someone in their jurisdiction for breaking a law in the US unless it would also be a violation of law there.

[breaktwister]

The fact is that the "crimes" committed by Party or whoever are not punishable in UK law. It is legal for their business to operate in the UK. Nothing the US can say or do will change this fact. This is not the same as the allegations of financial crime as per Natwest three etc.

Why do you think the US had to wait for BetonSports director and whoever else they try to nab to come on US soil? These directors operate legal businesses in their own jurisdictions and would not be given up by extradition.

If I am a PartyPoker shareholder will I get arrested next time Im in US?