Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Search Forums
Reload this Page Search Results
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Showing results 1 to 8 of 8
Search took 0.00 seconds. Search: Posts Made By: MiltonFriedman
Forum: Poker Legislation 09-12-2007, 04:55 PM
Replies: 33
Views: 170
Posted By MiltonFriedman
Re: No, this is not Party\'s party and the Silver lining re Regs. argum

Are your US taxes paid ? Do you live in a Good State or a Bad State ?

Are you an online poker player ? Affiliate ? or what ?
Forum: Poker Legislation 09-12-2007, 12:18 AM
Replies: 33
Views: 170
Posted By MiltonFriedman
Re: No, this is not Party\'s party and the Silver lining re Regs. argum

"the important distinction here is whether the membership is secret or known. "

Not quite .... I happen to think it is inevitably going to arise, given what representations need to be made at...
Forum: Poker Legislation 09-11-2007, 11:41 PM
Replies: 33
Views: 170
Posted By MiltonFriedman
Re: No, this is not Party\'s party and the Silver lining re Regs. argum

I previously had not seen that statement by Mr. Pappas. However, on its face, there is no reason to think he has lied at all. You seem to be WAY quick on the trigger.

What I am referring to was...
Forum: Poker Legislation 09-11-2007, 05:10 PM
Replies: 33
Views: 170
Posted By MiltonFriedman
Re: No, this is not Party\'s party and the Silver lining re Regs. argum

There are a lot of cases about associational standing. It is not dependent upon members joining a suit as plaintiffs.

However, that makes no difference here. iMEGA has only "secret" members....
Forum: Poker Legislation 09-11-2007, 01:09 PM
Replies: 33
Views: 170
Posted By MiltonFriedman
No, this is not Party\'s party and the Silver lining re Regs. arguments

1. The distinction is one without a difference.

2. "As to their tactic of broadening the scope of coverage of the UIGEA, one obviously does not have to look far to see who is behind that...
Forum: Poker Legislation 09-11-2007, 11:13 AM
Replies: 33
Views: 170
Posted By MiltonFriedman
iMEGA throws Affiliates under the bus .....

In its eagerness to argue injury, iMEGA throws affiliates under the UIGEA bus. At pages 8 -9, iMEGA, in an incredibly stupid vein, argues that affiliate marketers are violating UIGEA because they...
Forum: Poker Legislation 09-11-2007, 10:08 AM
Replies: 33
Views: 170
Posted By MiltonFriedman
Re: iMEGA Reply brief ... First look, NOT good.

Try this link: http://www.gambling911.com/iMEGA--Reply_Brief--Final--9-10-07.pdf

The copy was much better.

Briefly, my gut feeling is that the Plaintiff will lose on standing because it does...
Forum: Poker Legislation 09-11-2007, 09:47 AM
Replies: 33
Views: 170
Posted By MiltonFriedman
Re: iMEGA Reply brief ... anyone have a cleaner copy link

Bluff,

The Reply brief is about 70 pages, but the problem is that it looks like it is coated in vaseline, VERY tough to read. If anyone has a link to a more readable copy, that would be...
Showing results 1 to 8 of 8

 
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:19 AM.

Contact Us - www.twoplustwo.com - Archive - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.