Neteller Arrests

[MikeNaked]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LeFevre, a former hippie, started the hugely successful company with Steve Lawrence in 1999 but retired in 2002 in Costa Rica. Less is known of Lawrence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once a hippie, always a hippie.

[/ QUOTE ]



John Lefebvre. Playing the mandolin in a lake.

[whangarei]

[ QUOTE ]
Why not just leave the market segment that is violating the Wire Act by accepting bets over the telephone? But maybe these companies are not that smart. They have not been very smart so far; at least according to Ms. Shulman and Professor Rose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Telephone vs. internets is not relevant in this case. The complaint describes accessing Neteller and sportsbooks over the internets.

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
This article is interesting. http://www.cardplayer.com/poker_news/article/8117
Ms. Shulman seems to suggest that the WTO case included bets taken over the telephone. I didn't know that was the case. She does not comment on the new Neteller case. If she is correct, as she usually is, then this new case may be a test case on the WTO v. Wire Act and UIGEA.

[/ QUOTE ]


I was empaneled on an Investigational Grand Jury in the Los Angeles District court from July 2005-May 2006, I have a few points to raise that make me worry about this case.

1. The US Attornies office was backlogged at the time I was on the grand jury. It was not uncommon for us to work on cases that were approaching the edge of the Statute of Limitations for the case. Hence I am 99% confident UIGEA will not be in play on this case.

2. I am also 99% confident this case is very relevant for the two Neteller founders as they were in control of Neteller from 2002-2006. Can someone look up what the SOL is for RICO and the US Wire Tap act?

3. My speculation is that the goal of the US Attorneys office is to push Neteller out of the US market with this case.

[Wynton]

The Statute of Limitations is irrelevant. The complaint alleges an ongoing conspiracy that has continued through January, 2007.

[Bigwig]

Is there any reason to assume that this prosecution will have a short-term effect on Neteller?

[suzzer99]

Well despite the dems winning congress, it looks like the justice dept. is still going forward with the intimidation portion of it's 2-pronged attack (the other being pressuting banks to drop neteller or other stuff). I guess our best hope now is they're just making some noise and will get bored with chasing down online gaming executives. Hmmmm.

[daedalus]

where once there was napster....now there is [censored]. this is a natural process, too bad the hippie got chewed up on this one. It takes 2 months for a new neteller to pop up and it takes 5 years for DOJ to develop a case. We know how this one ends.

[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
It takes 2 months for a new neteller to pop up and it takes 5 years for DOJ to develop a case. We know how this one ends.

[/ QUOTE ]

nh

[Zele]

[ QUOTE ]
Is there any reason to assume that this prosecution will have a short-term effect on Neteller?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd say it's better than even money that they will announce on Thursday that they are pulling out of the US.

[Big Mike Watters]

Prolly not the right thread, but Absolute just denied my transaction through Neteller.