DOJ 1998 testimony stating an offshore casino can take US bets
 

Does anyone have a source for testimony by DOJ about the
Wire Act banning or not banning poker which is more recent than that quoted below ?


STATEMENT OF KEVIN V. DI GREGORY,
DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
CRIMINAL DIVISION
BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
CONCERNING
GAMBLING ON THE INTERNET
PRESENTED ON

JUNE 24, 1998
…
That being said, 18 U.S.C. 1084 -- the Wire Communications Act -- currently prohibits someone in the business of betting and wagering from using a wire communication facility for the transmission in interstate or foreign commerce of bets or wagers on any sporting event or contest. …
However, the Department also recognizes that the advent of Internet gambling may have diminished the overall effectiveness of the Wire Communications Act, in part, because that statute may relate only to sports betting and not to the type of real-time interactive gambling (e.g., poker) that the Internet now makes possible for the first time. Therefore, the Department generally supports the idea of amending the federal gambling statutes by clarifying that the Wire Communications Act applies to interactive casino betting and that the Act covers all Internet use, even if the Internet transmissions use modern technology -- such as satellite communications -- that may not be included in the traditional definition of "wire communications." …
With regard to the international aspects of the legislation, the United States needs to be very sensitive to issues of international law and comity in the Internet context. Because other countries, such as Australia, have declared their intention to permit Internet gambling operations to accept bets and wagers via the Internet, it will be difficult to enforce Internet gambling prohibitions against operations located outside the United States. More specifically, a foreign national who is operating a licensed Internet-based casino in his country will not be violating his country's laws if he solicits or accepts bets from United States citizens."

Keep in mind that the Wire Act was NOT amended by the UIGE Act.

Re: DOJ 1998 testimony stating an offshore casino can take US bets
 

Great Stuff!

Re: DOJ 1998 testimony stating an offshore casino can take US bets
 

Keyword there is "May"...there have been significant attempts over the years to beef up the Wire Act and bring it up to date.

Re: DOJ 1998 testimony stating an offshore casino can take US bets
 

[ QUOTE ]
Keyword there is "May"...there have been significant attempts over the years to beef up the Wire Act and bring it up to date.

[/ QUOTE ]

how was it "beefed up"?

Re: DOJ 1998 testimony stating an offshore casino can take US bets
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Keyword there is "May"...there have been significant attempts over the years to beef up the Wire Act and bring it up to date.

[/ QUOTE ]

how was it "beefed up"?

[/ QUOTE ]

note, I said "attempts"...

Re: DOJ 1998 testimony stating an offshore casino can take US bets
 

They recognized they didn't have jurisdiction ... this is why UIGEA attacks banks and funding instead of the actual gambling.

Re: DOJ 1998 testimony stating an offshore casino can take US bets
 

Nice catch on this Milton. Do you have a more formal cite? (i.e. - congressional record?).

Re: DOJ 1998 testimony stating an offshore casino can take US bets
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nice catch on this Milton. Do you have a more formal cite? (i.e. - congressional record?).

[/ QUOTE ] Google results for Kevin V DiGregory
You can find this testimony and some other similar stuff re: cybercrime with plenty of "DotGovs".

Re: DOJ 1998 testimony stating an offshore casino can take US bets
 

[ QUOTE ]
They recognized they didn't have jurisdiction ... this is why UIGEA attacks banks and funding instead of the actual gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to agree with this. Sniper, specifics were given in the 'wire act' that covered only certain games or types of wagers. They did this so that state operated gambling would not be affected most likely.

You cant just add stuff as time goes on. "Beefed Up" doesn't cut it... or if it was somehow, give specifics.

Re: DOJ 1998 testimony stating an offshore casino can take US bets
 

New administration in 2000, so their opinion changed. Big deal, it happens all of the time. You don't have to look any farther than the abortion issue, gun rights or pornography to see how that can happen.