[JPFisher55]

[ QUOTE ]
JP, I think your last line regarding the scaring of the banks is my major concern. Could the regs conceivablely come out this week and specifically single out Epassporte since they are one of the main providors of funding for the Big 2 poker sites? Then in turn the banks might be scared from dealing with Epassporte and overnight not accept transfers from Epassporte or allow the usage of the Epassporte card at their ATM machines. Thus "trapping", if you will, my money at Epassporte. Remember overreation by Party Poker and Neteller was unexpected by most of the 2p2 community last year.

I know the easy answer is hey Redbeard if you are that worried just get your money off of there. But if I do that I'm basically down as far as poker playing goes for a while until I can get onto the sites. And that may be some time off as the regulations could conceiveable not come out for a month or more. (Though I trust Berge greatly and would tend to lean toward any comments he has had and those indicated last week that the regs could easily be out in the next week to ten days.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually Redbeard, you will have some time between when the regulations are issued for comment and when the official regulations become law.
Actually, I am less worried about regulations that specifically target online poker or Epassporte, etc. These regulations can be challenged in court as too broad under the UIGEA or the constitution. Also, specific regulations provide clear standing for those firms directly mentioned or affected.
It's the more general regulation like don't deal with any unlawful gambling site or unlawful ewallet. The term unlawful is undefined and might scare banks into not dealing with lawful firms like Epassporte because of the uncertainity over what is lawful. It is harder to challenge such a regulation. Because such general regulations do not specifically affect firms such as Epassporte, it makes it harder for such firms to show standing to challenge them. It is harder to challenge general regulations as too broad under the UIGEA or under the constitution because they are vague. They allow the DOJ to claim that the general regs mean something that they may not without providing an easy means to challenge them in court.

The present situation reflects this problem. The DOJ has targeted the online sportsbetting industry and ewallets, including Neteller, that serviced them. The DOJ states that all online gambling is unlawful despite clear case law that has ruled otherwise. Numerous online poker sites have still left the US market out of fear, despite the lack of any prosecutions against online poker, because of the DOJ statements and the UIGEA.

Right now, unless the DOJ actually prosecutes or threatens some firm in the online poker industry it is hard to challenge the UIGEA in court because it is hard to show standing. The general nature of the UIGEA is going to present standing, and other, problems for iMEGA in its litigation against Gonzalez et. al.

I think and hope that Epassporte will not be so easily intimidated unlike Party Poker etc. which were easily intimidated.