How Bout These "Loopholes/End Runs"? (poker sites take note)

[Kneel B4 Zod]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe its just me, but being rich trumps living in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

Zod,

Most likely the sites that survive and find a workaround for us will be owned and staffed by citizens of other countries who will gladly trade being rich or very well paid for not being able to come here. The world doesn't revolve around us unless it involves nukes.

[/ QUOTE ]

look, we'll see. But consider a company like Full Tilt - essentially owned by Howard Lederer, with sig. equity shared held by Ivey, Ferguson, Harmon, etc - all Americans. what are they going to do?

In addition, sites being willing to take US play is only 1 small part of the equation. you being able to deposit, withdraw, and play is another.

[BluffTHIS!]

[censored] FT and party and stars. Who cares? We only want big sites that attract lots of fish. That most likely will be new sites and poker site world will change a lot. My prediction is Bodog could be such a big player and I addressed a thread in the zoo to them for hopefully a response from them.

[yoursmine]

One thing is for sure...Ill be looking into that bank account in the Caymans now. They DEFINITELY allow transactions to Neteller and to my current bacnk acct

[BluffTHIS!]

Canada is easier.

[Gregg777]

It really is going to be dead easy to fund poker sites, there is no way they can stop it.

More than two years ago when credit card companies prohibited deposits to online gaming sites, and before Neteller really took hold, you could purchase phone cards and the like, then use the phone cards as cash to deposit into the poker sites.

The same thing is, and always will be possible. It is completely impossible for any bank to prevent this from happening.

As soon as your bank blocked a particular form of payment, another one would pop up literally over night, even within hours.

[BluffTHIS!]

Greg,

See my phone card thread on 2nd page of this forum.

[Copernicus]

Im not sure why Mr K would say the bill doesnt include IP blocking. The way it reads imo is that the ISP is not required to police traffic to determine if the end server is a gambling site, but that if they are notified that a server is a gambling site they have to block it.

That means setting up a watchdog group to identify them, but it really shouldnt be that difficult.

What isnt clear to me is the cable workaround. Foreign owned satellite should work, but not enough players will bother. But if the law can be interpreted that (for example) the line from your house to Cox Cable and a satellite hookup from Cox Cable to a foreign based ISP does not make Cox an ISP (because Cox never connects directly to the Internet)then playing should be no problem. Funding would seem to have enough workarounds also, although immediate funding (as opposed to mail/B&M services like Western Union) might be gone.

There is a lot of emphasis in the bill on cooperation with foreign governments to prevent money laundering, but no teeth for prosecution of players that I can see.

The big gaming and internet law firms should have interpretations out in a week or so, hopefully they will filter down to us.

[BluffTHIS!]

Copernicus,

Just as with financial transactions, we need a 2nd middleman with internet routing. It shouldn't be insurmountable.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
Copernicus,

Just as with financial transactions, we need a 2nd middleman with internet routing. It shouldn't be insurmountable.

[/ QUOTE ]

that was my point, the problem lies in the definition of an Interactive Computer Service:

( 2) Interactive computer service
The term “interactive computer service” means any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions.


This is the law referenced by the bill. It looks very broad to me, and was probably intended to be so, because it was designed to prevent dissemination of kiddie porn.

A lot of middlemen can be caught up in that which is why I think that as a minimum the actual connection to the internet has to be offshore or satellite.

The definition includes "any....system". Home>Cable>Cable provider>Satellite>ICS>Internet still looks like a system to me, meaning the cable provider becomes an ICS.

That would leave direct to foreign owned satellite links the only workaround that I can see.

[BluffTHIS!]

They're not going to hold your isp provider responsible for routing to another site which then routes to the final destination, because they just wouldn't be able to track that for all customers. Now the final destination is clearly in violation, but they have to not care, just like sports betting sites in Costa Rica.