[DeadMoneyDad]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically each state has different laws and rulings. So for state law you have to interpret each state's laws.
The tax court decision does not necessarily apply to other laws. But a the federal Fifth Court of Appeals ruled that the Wire Act only applies to sports betting. Yet, the DOJ insists that it applies to all internet gambling and gaming. However, the DOJ has never prosecuted a poker only website or business concern. Cardplayer carries ads for poker websites, using the .com address in the ad.
IMO, the poker sites that left the US market did not have to leave unless they offered sports betting. But they did not want to risk a legal battle with the DOJ. Most ewallets left the US market because they provide services to sports betting sites, which is the basis for the prosecution against the Neteller execs under the Wire Act. I still think that the Neteller execs had valid defenses, but they settled. OTOH Epassporte openly serves US customers, but will only service poker only sites. The DOJ has not prosecuted Epassporte. Without a real test case with a prosecution by DOJ against some online poker concern, the law is still a matter of legal opinion, but the DOJ's failure to act IMO shows its real legal opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO the test on e-pass will be after the UIGEA regs are finalized.

As I understand it in CA, and Tuff would know this better, the rules are not skill vs no skill but "controled game." So to me the skill agrument has some validity but isn't controling.


D$D