Fossilman's Account Hacked?

[PairTheBoard]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]



Launching threats to send Howard Lederer to prison for supporting the suit? (essentially blackmail)

Yea that Daniel Negreanu, So full of class. What a heck of a guy.

Danny is a dirtbag. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see anywhere mentioned that he would report them for tax evasion (which is all hearsay anyways) for supporting the suit. If anything, it's because he simply doesn't like them. Dirtbag or not, I don't see any form of blackmail here.

Let's not start making things up now.

[/ QUOTE ]


I think it's a bit stronger than hearsay. I personally saw Annie mention it several times during a rant she had on UB yesterday during the $100 Aruba satellite when some observer asked her about the suit.

I tend to think it's true.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is I believe an accurate word for word transcript of what Daniel actually said in his 7-26-2006 video blog in which he mentions "tax records".

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel N -
I just think that in the media, that the World Poker Tour can have a field day with all the players' past, you know, tax records, legality of what they're doing, it's all this negative stuff. I mean I pray, literally I pray that they will drop the lawsuit because eventually it will crack down to all the poker players who are potentially involved with poker sites and things like that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think there's any way an honest onlooker could take that to be some kind of threat against anybody. Daniel is expressing his deep concern about the negative media for "all" poker players that the lawsuit may generate. There is certainly no mention of Howard Lederer in the comment.

Howard Lederer is mentioned in comments preceding this one as well as Chris Fergeson. Daniel talks about Fergeson's alleged claim that the WPT is preventing him from earning a living. Daniel then goes on to talk about how the WPT has enabled players to create "Brands" for themselves. Daniel gives Lederer as an example of such a player.

I don't know what Annie Duke is actually saying. Noone has posted any transcripts of her chat. However the comments posted above which are attributed to her are complete misrepresentations of what Daniel actually said in his vblog.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]


Annie said threats were directly toward her and Howard. I got the whiff that there was other communications between the two.

I wish I would of logged it down. Next time she's on, I'll sit and see if she can elaborate.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, we'll see what develops. But Daniel threatening them in a direct communication sounds terribly incredible. On the other hand, it's easy to hear a few words on a video blog and have an inaccurate reaction to them. Just look back in this thread. Mason only had to hear the word "books" a couple of times to conclude Daniel was talking about 2+2.

PairTheBoard

[Quicksilvre]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]



Launching threats to send Howard Lederer to prison for supporting the suit? (essentially blackmail)

Yea that Daniel Negreanu, So full of class. What a heck of a guy.

Danny is a dirtbag. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see anywhere mentioned that he would report them for tax evasion (which is all hearsay anyways) for supporting the suit. If anything, it's because he simply doesn't like them. Dirtbag or not, I don't see any form of blackmail here.

Let's not start making things up now.

[/ QUOTE ]


I think it's a bit stronger than hearsay. I personally saw Annie mention it several times during a rant she had on UB yesterday during the $100 Aruba satellite when some observer asked her about the suit.

I tend to think it's true.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is I believe an accurate word for word transcript of what Daniel actually said in his 7-26-2006 video blog in which he mentions "tax records".

[ QUOTE ]
Daniel N -
I just think that in the media, that the World Poker Tour can have a field day with all the players' past, you know, tax records, legality of what they're doing, it's all this negative stuff. I mean I pray, literally I pray that they will drop the lawsuit because eventually it will crack down to all the poker players who are potentially involved with poker sites and things like that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think there's any way an honest onlooker could take that to be some kind of threat against anybody. Daniel is expressing his deep concern about the negative media for "all" poker players that the lawsuit may generate. There is certainly no mention of Howard Lederer in the comment.

Howard Lederer is mentioned in comments preceding this one as well as Chris Fergeson. Daniel talks about Fergeson's alleged claim that the WPT is preventing him from earning a living. Daniel then goes on to talk about how the WPT has enabled players to create "Brands" for themselves. Daniel gives Lederer as an example of such a player.

I don't know what Annie Duke is actually saying. Noone has posted any transcripts of her chat. However the comments posted above which are attributed to her are complete misrepresentations of what Daniel actually said in his vblog.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]


Annie said threats were directly toward her and Howard. I got the whiff that there was other communications between the two.

I wish I would of logged it down. Next time she's on, I'll sit and see if she can elaborate.


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, we'll see what develops. But Daniel threatening them in a direct communication sounds terribly incredible. On the other hand, it's easy to hear a few words on a video blog and have an inaccurate reaction to them. Just look back in this thread. Mason only had to hear the word "books" a couple of times to conclude Daniel was talking about 2+2.

PairTheBoard

[/ QUOTE ]

Frankly, given their history, I don't regard anything Annie or Daniel say about each other as even remotely credible.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
Mr. Raymer....

The right thing for whom? For you? They are in it to make money for themselves plain and simple, and guess what...THEY HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO DO SO! Ultimately Mr. Raymer, they have no obligation to anyone to change their business strategies. It truly does not matter what it says on their release form, they are not forcing you to play, and ultimately the CHOICE to play is YOURS.

[/ QUOTE ]
bzzzt! wrong

[Nuke it]

I think Daniel has come across very well. He doesn't like the timing or basis for the suit. Fair enough...he has also gone out of his way in video blogs to preface everything with "I'm not a lawyer", and offers his opinion after that. The idea that Daniel is a whiney twerp is pretty ridiculous...I think just the opposite, the 7 in the suit sound like Latrell "I need to feed my kids" Sprewell. I think Daniel is right that they are indeed biting the hands that fed them. These people are the true ingrates, suing the people that made them famous.

[ekdikeo]

hi all [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I've just come into this thread, and admittedly have only read about halfway through it so far (very long thread, most of the forums i go to you're lucky to get more than 5 pages in a thread ever) ..

Daniel was the first person that I remember throwing a fit about the WPT, I don't understand why he'd talk against anyone that was trying to change the problem that he had.

Bruceypants looks to be a shill for someone with an interest in not changing the current status.

[mrconga]

Mr Raymer, relax. After a few years no one will care about you or use your images. The egos of these donkeys, wow.

At the end of it all, you should've read the release before signing it. If you dont like it, don't sign it. Period. Your whole anti-trust argument is a joke. Even DN, the "high school drop out" pointed out that there are other casinos one can host tourneys at. Get real and get over yourself. I doubt anyone even cares for the majority of the 7 plaintiffs. Annie duke? Lederer? LOL.

[HighStakesPro]

Here's the way I see this lawsuit:

The Players want to be able to play in WPT Events, but can't because they have signed endorsement deals with other companies that prevent them from playing in the WPT because of the release forms. Presumably it is not just the contracts they signed with online sites, because people like Ivey, Greenstein, Mizrachi, and many others who are sponsored by internet sites, including FullTilt and PokerStars, are still playing in the WPT, so it must be some other deals that these players have signed that prevents them from signing the release. However, one thing I don't understand is that they sign the WSOP release form. This one must somehow not interfere with their contracts and sign away their images, likenesses, etc; however, Negreanu said in his video blog that someone from WPT (Berman, Lipscomb maybe, I forget who) said they would gladly accept if the plyaers used the WSOP release form in lieu of the WPT release, and Negreanu said that the WSOP one was actually "worse". So I'm still unclear as far as why the plaintiffs can sign the WSOP release but not the WPT, and whether there is some other ulterior motive for them to boycott the WPT other than the release form, if what Negreanu said is in fatt true.

Now, let's say the WPT has the right to effectively (directly or not) to choose who plays in their events and who doesn't, by virtue of the terms of their release form. I understand that they want to give themselves as many rights to players' images and stuff as possible, but shouldn't one of their goals be to come up with a system in which all of the top players can play without being restricted by deals they've signed with internet sites? People like Howard Lederer became stars because of the WPT, so now the WPT is essentially saying "you won, you're a star now, but by using your stardom to land a deal with a poker site, you can no longer play in our events, even though we made you a star. So you can look at it both ways. I guess a lot of this depends on whether the players are just choosing not to play in the WPT because they lose potential profits from signing away the use of their images, likenesses, etc, or whether the contracts they have signed with other companies who endorse them, actually legally prevent them from playing. If the latter is the case, then the players have a legitimate gripe for sure, because shouldn't the WPT be trying to negotiate a way to get the star players playing in their tournaments? Do people really want to see final tables with a bunch of n00bs like Alex Kahaner and Danny Nguyen? I know I don't. I root for idiotic players like them to get crushed. But maybe the mainstreat audience that doesn't know very much poker is consumed by that Rocky mentality, always rooting for the brainless, ignorant underdogs against the heavily favored professionals. That's not me, but maybe that's the WPT's target audience. If so, this saddens me. Obviously, I understand that the whole allure of poker is that anybody can win, even the retardedest play money qualifier, if they get lucky enough against the bigtime pros, but the format should still cater to having the final tables consistently filled by top players, or at least good ones, so Mike Sexton doesn't have to kiss their ass in an interview after they play horribly, and try to spin it to make it sound like they just climbed Mount Olympus. Okay this is verging on a rant so I'll keep going.

So the main issue for me is that these top players should not be excluded, effectively because of the benefits they have reaped from their star power. Just like the WPT has "fed" them, they too have benefited the WPT, and some kind of negotiation or settlement should be reached that allows the players to maintain some use of their likenesses and images so that it doesn't violate whatever contracts they have with other companies, because in my estimation, the WPT needs top players in their events. There of course is also the issue of how bad the release really is, why th ey can sign the WSOP release but not the WPT one, the claims Negreanu made in his blog, etc. I assume that all of this information will come out once the suit is carried out in court and a judgement or settlement reached. Hopefully this will not cause the WPT to go bankrupt or reduce operations or anything, as I'm sure that nobody wants that.

[Lawman007]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's the way I see this lawsuit:

The Players want to be able to play in WPT Events, but can't because they have signed endorsement deals with other companies that prevent them from playing in the WPT because of the release forms. Presumably it is not just the contracts they signed with online sites, because people like Ivey, Greenstein, Mizrachi, and many others who are sponsored by internet sites, including FullTilt and PokerStars, are still playing in the WPT, so it must be some other deals that these players have signed that prevents them from signing the release. However, one thing I don't understand is that they sign the WSOP release form. This one must somehow not interfere with their contracts and sign away their images, likenesses, etc; however, Negreanu said in his video blog that someone from WPT (Berman, Lipscomb maybe, I forget who) said they would gladly accept if the plyaers used the WSOP release form in lieu of the WPT release, and Negreanu said that the WSOP one was actually "worse". So I'm still unclear as far as why the plaintiffs can sign the WSOP release but not the WPT, and whether there is some other ulterior motive for them to boycott the WPT other than the release form, if what Negreanu said is in fatt true.

Now, let's say the WPT has the right to effectively (directly or not) to choose who plays in their events and who doesn't, by virtue of the terms of their release form. I understand that they want to give themselves as many rights to players' images and stuff as possible, but shouldn't one of their goals be to come up with a system in which all of the top players can play without being restricted by deals they've signed with internet sites? People like Howard Lederer became stars because of the WPT, so now the WPT is essentially saying "you won, you're a star now, but by using your stardom to land a deal with a poker site, you can no longer play in our events, even though we made you a star. So you can look at it both ways. I guess a lot of this depends on whether the players are just choosing not to play in the WPT because they lose potential profits from signing away the use of their images, likenesses, etc, or whether the contracts they have signed with other companies who endorse them, actually legally prevent them from playing. If the latter is the case, then the players have a legitimate gripe for sure, because shouldn't the WPT be trying to negotiate a way to get the star players playing in their tournaments? Do people really want to see final tables with a bunch of n00bs like Alex Kahaner and Danny Nguyen? I know I don't. I root for idiotic players like them to get crushed. But maybe the mainstreat audience that doesn't know very much poker is consumed by that Rocky mentality, always rooting for the brainless, ignorant underdogs against the heavily favored professionals. That's not me, but maybe that's the WPT's target audience. If so, this saddens me. Obviously, I understand that the whole allure of poker is that anybody can win, even the retardedest play money qualifier, if they get lucky enough against the bigtime pros, but the format should still cater to having the final tables consistently filled by top players, or at least good ones, so Mike Sexton doesn't have to kiss their ass in an interview after they play horribly, and try to spin it to make it sound like they just climbed Mount Olympus. Okay this is verging on a rant so I'll keep going.

So the main issue for me is that these top players should not be excluded, effectively because of the benefits they have reaped from their star power. Just like the WPT has "fed" them, they too have benefited the WPT, and some kind of negotiation or settlement should be reached that allows the players to maintain some use of their likenesses and images so that it doesn't violate whatever contracts they have with other companies, because in my estimation, the WPT needs top players in their events. There of course is also the issue of how bad the release really is, why th ey can sign the WSOP release but not the WPT one, the claims Negreanu made in his blog, etc. I assume that all of this information will come out once the suit is carried out in court and a judgement or settlement reached. Hopefully this will not cause the WPT to go bankrupt or reduce operations or anything, as I'm sure that nobody wants that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. It's as clear as mud now. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Assani Fisher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Could a company theoretically :

Say they want to sponsor Greg for a product. Greg says "Give me 100k or no deal. " Could this company just go to the WPT and offer them say 25k for Greg's images and other stuff?

If so, that's pretty wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you have signed the release form put forth by the WPT, then this is exactly what could happen .

[/ QUOTE ]

The WPT has been around for a while. Has this happened ever? If not, then it seems a bit silly to be suing against a hypothetical.

[True North]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Could a company theoretically :

Say they want to sponsor Greg for a product. Greg says "Give me 100k or no deal. " Could this company just go to the WPT and offer them say 25k for Greg's images and other stuff?

If so, that's pretty wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you have signed the release form put forth by the WPT, then this is exactly what could happen .

[/ QUOTE ]

The WPT has been around for a while. Has this happened ever? If not, then it seems a bit silly to be suing against a hypothetical.

[/ QUOTE ]
It only takes them changing their mind once. Plus, who's to say ownership's going to be the same down the road?