Re: A question for the lawers
I dont have the cite for the mastercard case handy - its been posted on the web a few times though, link to come later if someone else doesnt give it.
On the "business of betting and wagering" thing, its new question under the law, so what the courts would ultimately rule is a guess. But certainly it can at least be argued that only sites that provide house-banked games or take sports bets are in the business of betting, 'cause they are the only ones who are actually engaging in betting with the player. This is one of many arguments as to why the UIGEA does not apply to poker-only sites.
And yes, as you will find discussed in the thread on comments to the regs, banks over-blocking is the undeniable major threat to us from the UIGEA.
Skallagrim
|