[JPFisher55]

[ QUOTE ]
The potential I see here for a deal has 2 parts:

1. Uncoded Transactions processing + waiver of prosecution in return for lots of money.

2. Comfort letter that poker alone does not violate Wire Act.

Setting the bar high on Part 1 will allow DOJ to collect "back taxes" on poker companies which ran uncoded credit card transactions. Thus, a free pass it is not.

DOJ Clarification on #2 should be free, look at the In Re Mastercard decision by the 5th Circuit; so what is the ethical issue you seem to discern ? It would allow Party to re-enter the market, sell itself to Harrahs or whatever else it has been angling for for the last year or so.

Are deals like this cut ? Uh ... in real life, yes. No one is doing anything unusual under this scenario;

Party to DOJ, you know that credit cards settlement is pretty genrous of you and we would like to take it, BUT we can't afford to do so because we lost our US market.

DOJ to Party, well, we know you are stand-up guys who came to us voluntarily to settle this credit card stuff, but you misunderstand the Wire Act ... It doesn't even apply to online poker, you should have asked us last year.

Party to DOJ : DOH!!!, okay here's your check for $X.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope that you are right and this deal occurs. I would not mind Party Poker and Pacific Poker paying for the poker exemption for the rest of the online poker sites that probably did the same things as those 2 companies.
However, my credit cards have never worked at a poker site or ewallet.