|
|
#41
09-30-2006, 02:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A very good breakdown of the bill
The litigation against this bill will obviously be time consuming and expensive. Could you give us a guess as to who would be willing to foot the bill? The banking industry? The internet cash sites such as Neteller and Firepay? The online poker sites? Others?
Secondary question: Where would you guess the litigation would take place? US courts? WTO? Tertiary question: How long do you guess this could be tied up in court(s) before it can be enforced, if enforcement is legal and possible? Doc 
|
|
#42
09-30-2006, 02:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very good breakdown of the bill
[ QUOTE ]
Harrah's is regulated by the Nevada Gaming Control Board (I believe that's the name). The NGCB allowed Harrah's in 2006 to have wink-wink agreements with the .net sites, because they weren't illegal online gambling. They allowed the sites to buy-in directly for their players. Do you honestly believe that the Nevada gaming regulatory authorities will allow a licensed casino to have dealings with an entity that's illegal? Nevada gaming authorities already tightened their rules in August (remember how players couldn't wear ".com" logowear)? Accepting advertising for an illegal entity is generally illegal. [/ QUOTE ] The sites are no more illegal after this bill than they were before it.
|
|
#43
09-30-2006, 02:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very good breakdown of the bill
[ QUOTE ]
The sites are no more illegal after this bill than they were before it. [/ QUOTE ] although this is kind of a tangent, the sad truth is that they appear to be for the average joe who picks up his paper/yahoo news and reads that "internet gambling was banned" or some such thing, and rushes to cash out his last few bucks from stars or whatever.
|
|
#44
09-30-2006, 02:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very good breakdown of the bill
[ QUOTE ]
2. The possibility of a government-mandated ISP block. 3. The possibility that it is difficult for serious players (basically impossible for casual players) to deposit. [/ QUOTE ] On 2., 5363 (I believe) (c)(1)(C) Limitation Relating to Interactive Computer Services says: "not impose any obligation on an interactive computer service to monitor its service or affirmatively seek facts indicating actively violating this subchapter." So my take on this is ISP cannot be required to block gaming sites, just that they can't be sued if they choose to. 3. Maybe this is too simple: a money order? It'd be a pain to mail, but your bank doesn't know where it's giong when you buy it, so how could they stop such a transaction?
|
|
#45
09-30-2006, 03:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
A silver lining
It will bascily be the responsiblity of the Executive Branch to implement this bill. In other words the Bush administration. I'm sure we can expect them to do this as effectively as they managed the war in Iraq and Hurricaine Katrina disaster relief:
"Soitanly we're gonna put a stop to internet gambling! Nyuk, nyuk nyuk, Ow!"
|
|
#46
09-30-2006, 03:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very good breakdown of the bill
[ QUOTE ]
3. Maybe this is too simple: a money order? It'd be a pain to mail, but your bank doesn't know where it's giong when you buy it, so how could they stop such a transaction? [/ QUOTE ] How is this different from a personal check? In either case the question is whether the online site can get your bank to make payment.
|
|
#47
09-30-2006, 03:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very good breakdown of the bill
Big difference.
The money order can be filled out after it leaves the bank and it is as good as cash. The check will be refused coming into the bank because of the gaming company on the check.
|
|
#48
09-30-2006, 03:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very good breakdown of the bill
the gaming company can go through a bank in another country when they send a check, can't they??
Seems a money-order (and probably some sort of fee with it) would be difficult to stop.
|
|
#49
09-30-2006, 03:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very good breakdown of the bill
this shouldn't be that much of a problem. They can just set up dummy companies or re-route their payments through another business so that the coding is different.
|
|
#50
09-30-2006, 04:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A very good breakdown of the bill
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The sites are no more illegal after this bill than they were before it. [/ QUOTE ] although this is kind of a tangent, the sad truth is that they appear to be for the average joe who picks up his paper/yahoo news and reads that "internet gambling was banned" or some such thing, and rushes to cash out his last few bucks from stars or whatever. [/ QUOTE ] 1)Is it even in the papers? 2)Hell, I thought it was illegal when I first started playing. 2+ years and 1600+ table hours later I'm still here.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
