NOW IS the time to seek declaratory relief for "poker", huh, PPA ?

[MiltonFriedman]

I have been reading the Proposed Regulations. In my opinion, by their refusal to determine which forms of "gambling" are covered, the Agencies understandably punted.

The proposed Regs ARE out, they will not single out whetehr or not "poker" is covered by the UIGE Act.

Engineer,

PPA should seek a declaratory judgement, as a representative of "poker" players, and others such as CardPlayer and epassporte should join as plaintiffs, that the UIGEA does not cover poker, and, even if so, "poker" is not illegal under Federal laws. Such a suit was practically invited by these proposed Regulations.

Read the Sections why there is reluctance to publish a 'blacklist" and how questions of legality of internet gambling should be resolved by reference to underlying substative law.

Senator D'Amato is quoted publicly in the press as saying online poker is NOT prohibited by federal law. Unlike iMEGA, the PPA can show standing, the PPA can show ripeness, and the PPA can show a need for declaratory relief, as the FBI has threatened to prosecute people who play card games online. I think Al D'Amato would make a great individual plaintiff, not to mention getting great press.

If "poker" is NOT federally prohibited, why should PPA memebers be left to the whims of banks' business risk assesment. A Federal suit declaring that poker is NOT covered by the UIGE or is not federally prohibited would give Banks cover to process online poker deposits. The time to seek relief is NOW.

Well, okay then PPA, file a suit to clarify that "poker" is

(a) not covered by the business model addressed by the UIGEA, poker sites are not engaged in "betting or wagering" but are simply a third party interactive service provider to individuals who DO bet or wager, and, even IF covered by the UIGE,

(b) online poker is not prohibited by any Federal Statute, despite the FBI's website threatening prosecution of individual players.

IF the PPA loses, and poker is federally prohibited, then there is always the Wexler Bill to back.

Milton Friedman