Can someone explain how Full Tilt is still in business? Doyle?

[mhcmarty]

[ QUOTE ]
That is your take on it, here is the Justice Departments:

"Online poker is online gambling. And online gambling, we would say, is illegal," Justice Department spokeswoman Jaclyn Lesch said.

[/ QUOTE ]

The DOJ doesn't write code. Their opinion is just that. If they thought they had a case in respect to on-line poker they would have brought charges long ago.

[DrewOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
Full Tilt recently relocated their United States operations from the United States to Ireland. If you think that's just a coincidence, then you probably also think that the government won't enforce the new law. LOL

[/ QUOTE ]

Wasn't that Crypto that relocated to Ireland? Or did FT bolt across the pond as well?

Either way, no, it ain't no coincidence.

[invisibleleadsoup]

are lottery and lawman the same person?
surely there couldn't be two people this lame on the same forum

[eastbay]

It is no guarantee of anything, but I think the Feds are aware that there might be a public outcry and backlash if they arrested a bunch of popular pros that millions of people know from TV. It seems unlikely they are going to round all these guys up soon.

eastbay

[thetruest]

[ QUOTE ]
It is no guarantee of anything, but I think the Feds are aware that there might be a public outcry and backlash if they arrested a bunch of popular pros that millions of people know from TV. It seems unlikely they are going to round all these guys up soon.

eastbay

[/ QUOTE ]

this especially pertains to Doyle, who is somewhat of an American icon.

I really wish they would go after him in fact, and I think he even wants that to happen to. It would utterly seal our victory.

[jackaaron]

[ QUOTE ]
I am amazed that this site and the other famous forum still have links and ads. Oh and I am a lawyer. Its not clear cut. But US Attorneys can very aggressive and innovative when they want to attack an area.

I sure wouldn't be taking those chances. Sometimes I think people minimize how serious the potential criminal exposure can be.

One other example--all the emphasis on the New Orleans federal district court opinion holding that poker is a game of skill and therefore covered under the Wire Act. I haven't read the decision but I did read a summary of the facts. Debtors sued by their credit card company claimed that their poker wagers constituted illegal wagers and therefore they should not have pay charges incurred on their credit cards.

This reasoning sounds to me to be result oriented. Our conservative pro business federal courts are unlikely to side with individuals looking to escape their debts on such a technicality. To believe that this precedent will hold up in a different fact context--where the US government pursues a criminal prosecution of individuals on notice of this law and who flaunt the law, is much more of a gamble in my view than going all in with Ace Rag after two early position raisers.

Way too much smug confidence here. I don't mean to be the
bearer of bad news. But I do not think there is enough healthy respect about the power and resolve of the US government and its law enforcement arm when it pursues an agenda.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't it also true that when indictments come down, and people from the sites try to prove poker is a game of skill that it won't matter? Even if they prove it, they will have violated the law BEFORE it was proven, and thus, still be in trouble regardless of whether poker is proven as a skill or not?

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[mackem]

[ QUOTE ]
The new law has done nothing to increase or decrease the criminality of online poker. at the worst it makes it harder to deposit and may effect peoples attempts to gain access to their accounts.

Everyone that posts things like "shouldn't these pro's be worried" are either ill informed or morons. I would guess the latter. I am sure millionaires like ivey and doyle aren't going to risk jail time for some added revenue. THey have sought legal counsel and determined nothing has changed.

[/ QUOTE ]

If nothing has changed why did the biggest poker site kneejerk and kill 80% of their profits overnight?

[Canard]

[ QUOTE ]

Isn't it also true that when indictments come down, and people from the sites try to prove poker is a game of skill that it won't matter? Even if they prove it, they will have violated the law BEFORE it was proven, and thus, still be in trouble

[/ QUOTE ]

Err, what? That is the function of a trial, to establish whether an offence has been committed or not. If I kill someone and the trial establishes that I acted in self-defence, they ain't going to lock me up on the basis that I acted before it had been established that I was acting in self-defence!