thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

I didn't see this link yet. Please delete if it is old news, I don't keep up with this much anymore. Up to 151 countries are going to seek compensation, yada, yada, yada.

http://www.itnews.com.au/Tools/Print.aspx?CIID=94400

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=1&vc=1

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

It so funny to me when I saw Bush and the Republicans on TV today talking about how much "free trade" helps the economy of the US and the world. Yet they are so against free trade when it comes to protecting the horse racing lobby and other people who stuff money in their pockets so they will fight to ban internet poker. Typical Republican hypocrisy at it's finest.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

This story got a little play at digg. The masses may know a tad more about it now.

http://www.digg.com/playable_web_games/U...Online_Gambling

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
Typical political hypocrisy at it's finest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
It so funny to me when I saw Bush and the Republicans on TV today talking about how much "free trade" helps the economy of the US and the world. Yet they are so against free trade when it comes to protecting the horse racing lobby and other people who stuff money in their pockets so they will fight to ban internet poker. Typical Republican hypocrisy at it's finest.

[/ QUOTE ]


Anyone who beleives most politicans from either party has a bad beat in their future.


D$D

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

Who is going to collect ? The Belgian military ?

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
Who is going to collect ? The Belgian military ?

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't really get it do you? Nobody has to collect anything. If US do not comply the end will be that any US patent or any copyrighted material can be 'pirated' legally. No US exports, no US economy. The days when the US industry drove the world economy has been over for decades, and the former eastern block and china have only started turning the wheels. Remember when the USD was close to the GBP? How is it these days? How is the US trade deficit and the budget deficit? US is relying heavily on the rest of the world to keep the wheels turning.

If US isolates itself from the rest of the world it will be 1929 over again, except the rest of the world won't really feel the effect.

So to answer your question, the Andorran Navy will do just nicely.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

Oh, you'll feel it.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

This whole issue is rapidly becoming a major economic story for the US. Why has this not been part of the political discussion, specifically the recent debates?

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
This whole issue is rapidly becoming a major economic story for the US. Why has this not been part of the political discussion, specifically the recent debates?

[/ QUOTE ]

because the american public as a whole is a retard who can't feed themselves

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This whole issue is rapidly becoming a major economic story for the US. Why has this not been part of the political discussion, specifically the recent debates?

[/ QUOTE ]

because the american public as a whole is a retard who can't feed themselves

[/ QUOTE ]
That includes our most of our major media outlets, politicians and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This whole issue is rapidly becoming a major economic story for the US. Why has this not been part of the political discussion, specifically the recent debates?

[/ QUOTE ]


because the american public as a whole is a retard who can't feed themselves

[/ QUOTE ]
That includes our most of our major media outlets, politicians and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lately I've been classifying US citizens into two groups.

Those that have a hole in their heads,

and,

those that have their head in a hole.....



D$D

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who is going to collect ? The Belgian military ?

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't really get it do you? Nobody has to collect anything. If US do not comply the end will be that any US patent or any copyrighted material can be 'pirated' legally. No US exports, no US economy. The days when the US industry drove the world economy has been over for decades, and the former eastern block and china have only started turning the wheels. Remember when the USD was close to the GBP? How is it these days? How is the US trade deficit and the budget deficit? US is relying heavily on the rest of the world to keep the wheels turning.

If US isolates itself from the rest of the world it will be 1929 over again, except the rest of the world won't really feel the effect.

So to answer your question, the Andorran Navy will do just nicely.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know nothing about economics, obviously.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who is going to collect ? The Belgian military ?

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't really get it do you? Nobody has to collect anything. If US do not comply the end will be that any US patent or any copyrighted material can be 'pirated' legally. No US exports, no US economy. The days when the US industry drove the world economy has been over for decades, and the former eastern block and china have only started turning the wheels. Remember when the USD was close to the GBP? How is it these days? How is the US trade deficit and the budget deficit? US is relying heavily on the rest of the world to keep the wheels turning.

If US isolates itself from the rest of the world it will be 1929 over again, except the rest of the world won't really feel the effect.

So to answer your question, the Andorran Navy will do just nicely.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know nothing about economics, obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny enough it was all the "smart money" that was jumping from high buildings almost exactly 78 years ago. The average guy's only concern was getting landed on by the "smart money"!



D$D

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
You know nothing about economics, obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only macro and micro economics at university level, a quite bit beyond the 101 stuff you get in college.

So I guess that you teach post grad economics? Or hold a doctorate in economics? Or?

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

OK, so suppose this happens and the US is forced back into WTO, etc; what is the outcome of all this? Does this mean that US players will no longer be restricted from currently banned sites? If so, I'm assuming the US will put regulations in place. Is another possible outcome that the US provides regulated sites only? I'm trying to see the bigger picture.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

Yeah it seems to get tricky at that point. How is the Fed going to make the States allow online gambling?

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

The Us is a bunch f gangstas. We tell peole they cant have nukes but we have em. We invade countries for no reason. So what someone says we owe 1 billion. Do u think we will pay. We will laugh at the face of the world and they will still ask us for protection. Damn I hate repupblicans!

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
OK, so suppose this happens and the US is forced back into WTO, etc; what is the outcome of all this? Does this mean that US players will no longer be restricted from currently banned sites? If so, I'm assuming the US will put regulations in place. Is another possible outcome that the US provides regulated sites only? I'm trying to see the bigger picture.

[/ QUOTE ]

The bigger picture is the US will at some point have US based on-line poker sites.

Either they will be forced to accept off-shore sites, or someone will force them to accept a new or existing US site. Or some combination of the the three.

The $365 Billion dollar question is how big a bet will it take for the US gov't to fold.....


D$D

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

The US has pocket AA suited and they just flop 7 of a kind. Some one tell Bush what to do and he will blow them up? I dont see any major changes until Hillary or Obama get in office.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

this has devolved into BBV/zoo type bickering. Maybe withdrawl with Milton seems enticing.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

Karak,

I think not following this ruling will give China and other far eastern economies free reign on violating US copyright laws which the US has been trying to get them to follow. It'd be a huge setback in that regard.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
Karak,

I think not following this ruling will give China and other far eastern economies free reign on violating US copyright laws which the US has been trying to get them to follow. It'd be a huge setback in that regard.

[/ QUOTE ]

The US will IMO have to block all on-line gaming or lisence it. There seems to be no middle position.

Although I could see a Wexler type poker on-line solution making all this go away for the US and the current administration. I just don't see it happening before Jan 2009 at the soonest.


D$D

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
Although I could see a Wexler type poker on-line solution making all this go away for the US and the current administration.

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

A Wexler-type poker solution does not make the WTO issue go away. DUCY?

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
Karak,

I think not following this ruling will give China and other far eastern economies free reign on violating US copyright laws which the US has been trying to get them to follow. It'd be a huge setback in that regard.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah I think this is similar to China's copyright issues in the sense that the ruling is completing meaningless.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah I think this is similar to China's copyright issues in the sense that the ruling is completing meaningless.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. China can claim that they have illegal copying that they try to prevent and in any case the US does not really want sanctions on Chineses goods that keep Wal Mart prices low. The US position on China is to persuade them to do more, occasionaly talking tough.

In this case it is definitely the US government and Antigua can benefit by using the IPR sanctions plus the EU and the ROW will happily have a pop at some parts of the US export trade and demand greater access to US markets in other areas.

The US will be facing a big cost to maintain UIGEA and the Wire Act, China has little to fear in terms of US sanctions given their huge trade surplus and because all they need to do is gaol a few more pirates to be off the hook.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

It will all depend on the price tag. The US is no position to totally withdraw from GATTS and the WTO. The current US administration will never back off its anti-gambling stance unless forced to by congress. Congress will only force the issue if the price tag is big enough to hurt. That will depend on the outcome of the pending hearings.

Small price tag, Bush Admin will pay it.

Big price tag, Bush Admin will want to pay, but Congress will act (money talks). Congress' action would have to be either a total ban on online gambling or a totally open to foreign competition but regulated market.

The out of the box solution would be for Congress to authorize (and maybe regulate) all online skill gaming (and include their pet projects like pari-mutual horse racing and fantasy sports as skill games - and hopefully poker) while banning all online games of chance (and define sportsbetting as a game of chance to placate the leagues). This isnt quite the Wexler bill, but the Wexler bill is a good place to start.

Skallagrim

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

IMO, if and when the WTO grants Antiqua's request to lawfully ignore their IP obligations to US, then the music, movie and entertainment industry tells DEMS fix it or no more money. Soon thereafter, a bill to repeal UIGEA and exempt online gambling from all federal gambling laws is attached to must pass Iraq funding or other must pass budget bill.
However, no IP sanction and the Bush administration can skate. The legitimacy of the WTO is at stake. It either grants Antiqua's request or no small to medium nation, and most large ones, will not honor its decisions.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]

The out of the box solution would be for Congress to authorize (and maybe regulate) all online skill gaming (and include their pet projects like pari-mutual horse racing and fantasy sports as skill games - and hopefully poker) while banning all online games of chance (and define sportsbetting as a game of chance to placate the leagues). This isnt quite the Wexler bill, but the Wexler bill is a good place to start.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a horrible idea.

1> It is not up to Congress to "authorize" anything. Everything is supposed to be legal unless it is made illegal by law, not the other way around.

2> Splitting hairs is dangerous. What if poker ends up on the wrong side of the skill vs. chance split? Facts don't matter here; they rarely do in politics.

3> It is not up to Congress or anyone else in the Federal Government to determine what is or isn't gambling. That's a state power.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The out of the box solution would be for Congress to authorize (and maybe regulate) all online skill gaming (and include their pet projects like pari-mutual horse racing and fantasy sports as skill games - and hopefully poker) while banning all online games of chance (and define sportsbetting as a game of chance to placate the leagues). This isnt quite the Wexler bill, but the Wexler bill is a good place to start.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is a horrible idea.

1> It is not up to Congress to "authorize" anything. Everything is supposed to be legal unless it is made illegal by law, not the other way around.

2> Splitting hairs is dangerous. What if poker ends up on the wrong side of the skill vs. chance split? Facts don't matter here; they rarely do in politics.

3> It is not up to Congress or anyone else in the Federal Government to determine what is or isn't gambling. That's a state power.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong

1) the choice Congress will be forced to make if the WTO sanctions are significant is simple: Ban all online gaming or ban none. Which do you really think is more likely, especially with the NFL/FOF/nanny-staters putting the pressure on? Your otherwise correct statement that congress doesnt authorize things is irrelevant.

2) Poker could end up on the wrong side, yes. But you have to play politics - if all online gaming is banned to comply with the WTO, poker is already on the wrong side.

3) States rights are not relevant here - the internet is by definition and design "interstate commerce." Thats a Federal responsibility under the Constitution. A state can say what it wants about gambling within its borders, but the Feds get to say what they want about gambling across borders. Plus states rights are irrelevant to the WTO.

The major point is that there is virtually zero support for legalized online sportsbetting, and plenty of well financed opposition. My "out of the box" idea was to find a way to keep poker OK without having to make sportsbetting OK. You got a better idea? Lets hear it if you do.


Skallagrim

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

There has to be some relevance in regards to states rights and the WTO, at least indirectly. If the Feds allow gambling but a state does not, won't that still cause free trade conflicts with the WTO?

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Although I could see a Wexler type poker on-line solution making all this go away for the US and the current administration.

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

A Wexler-type poker solution does not make the WTO issue go away. DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

What is DUCY? Dumb Unknowing Chatty Yahoo?

Wexler type bill makes a good potion of the WTO go away on the skills game bit. Congress might be able to live with that. We don't know unless they can some how complete the circle.

The US then says it is established law long before GATT that unresitricted sports type betting is and had been illegal. (almost 50 years of established Wire Act law)


First Congress has to repeal the UIGEA.

Then Congress writes a decent bill that creates a level playing field for all prospective, past and current operators can operate under. The easy solution...

This will not happen as the B&M's figure they have the muscle to keep anyone who "violated" the UIGEA from getting a shot at the US market. This is why PP got out of the market, they want a future on-line room.

If Mason and Bluff are right this is why control of the PPA board is important as FT & PS are the most likey to be thrown under the bus and have the most to loose.

So forget and ignore the unrestricted sports book hype, it just isn't going to happen, if they push too hard they will gum up the works for the on-line poker world. We have enough problems as it is without their help!


D$D

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
Only macro and micro economics at university level, a quite bit beyond the 101 stuff you get in college.

So I guess that you teach post grad economics? Or hold a doctorate in economics? Or?

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's rewind the tape, shall we?

[ QUOTE ]
No US exports, no US economy. ... How is the US trade deficit...

[/ QUOTE ]

So we're in the weaker position because we sell things to the rest of the world, and we're in the weaker position because the rest of the world sells things to us. I guess "university level" doesn't teach you how to manage a coherent paragraph.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

Congress will not ban off-track pari-mutual horse racing because the horse racing lobby and industry donate too much to Congress. Congress will not ban online fantasy sports because the operators and sports leagues, major donors, want online fantasy sports. Congress will not ban online state lotteries because the affected states would leave the union and we cannot fight a civil war again. Ok the affected states could not afford all the federal mandated spending and would go bankrupt; same thing.
So the only alternative is permit all online gambling. Then after a few years, Congress will pass a law permitting licensed and regulated online gambling businesses to operate from US at high tax rate. Ok Congress might try a IGREA solution, but this will not fly with WTO. No other nation taxes or regulates foreign online gambling sites, not even UK.
But I think that the granting of the IP sanction is only 50/50 and now Jay says decision may take to 1st quarter of 2008. So anything will take a long time.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
What is DUCY? Dumb Unknowing Chatty Yahoo?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do U C Y -- I think it's a Sklansky thing.

[ QUOTE ]
The US then says it is established law long before GATT that unresitricted sports type betting is and had been illegal. (almost 50 years of established Wire Act law)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm no international trade lawyer, but I'm pretty sure this argument doesn't make the WTO issue go away.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Although I could see a Wexler type poker on-line solution making all this go away for the US and the current administration.

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

A Wexler-type poker solution does not make the WTO issue go away. DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wexler type bill makes a good potion of the WTO go away on the skills game bit. The US then says it is established law long before GATT that unresitricted sports type betting is and had been illegal. (almost 50 years of established Wire Act law)

D$D

[/ QUOTE ]

Quite to the contrary, the Wexler bill would bring the US further out of compliance with the WTO decision.

If the US is claiming they have a moral problem with remote gaming, adding more while still blocking foreign competitors does not bring them closer to compliance.

The WTO doesn't make any artificial distinctions among types of gambling. If it were about skill, lotteries would be gone way before sports.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

Jay, as usual, is absolutely right on this issue.

But he isn't as sneaky as me. The part of GATTS at issue does not specifically define "gambling" but it does pretty much require all online gambling or no online gambling.

So the US Congress defines "gambling." And does it in a way that allows things most people support (which Al D. and the PPA will insure includes poker) and excludes things most people dislike (sports betting and to a lesser extent slots and other classic "against the house" games). Of course everything not defined as gambling has to allow for foreign competition.

At the very least, the US CAN THEN ARGUE that it is complying with the WTO ruling. And poor Antigua and Jay can start another round of litigation. I dont like what that does to Antigua and JC, but I feel I have to think of us poker players first.

Skallagrim

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

There are, of course, non-arbitrary reasons to distinguish poker from player-vs-house games.

Re: thinktank says US will owe $100 billion
 

Skall, I think you know that argument has already been settled by the WTO. Their panel decision used a very broad definition of gambling. The WTO will not accept a narrower definition of gambling. I agree that it is all or nothing. But I don't see how the US could be further out of compliance with the WTO; more hypocritical maybe, but that would be difficult.
But I am not sure that the WTO will really enforce its ruling by IP trade sanction. Like most international organizations, with the UN in the lead, it may take a lesser action that renders its decisions meaningless. I hope not, but I think it's a coin flip.