|
|
#21
10-04-2006, 06:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: A Silver Lining, WTO?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] UK may offer up some token resistance, but it won't have any substance [/ QUOTE ] Oh we'll happily have a go. Gordon Brown is the guy who legislated to bring the sites on shore (watch for news on this v soon) and he has a leadership election coming up in the next year and will want to put some distance between the US and UK to appeal to his party's roots. Championing free trade is the perfect story for him as it also reassures the right of the party whilst bashing Bush- especially as he will be talking tough for Africa at the same time appealing to the left. EU is getting stroppy even over flight information we'll happily do it for poker. Poker would be a low priority but it's a sure fire win so will be used as a stick. [/ QUOTE ] Gambling is a dirty word. Internet gambling is even dirtier. I really can't see any British politician making to much of a song and dance about protecting the right to gamble as it's not a vote winner. That said Labour did relax, and continue to do so, the gambling laws in Britain. 
|
|
#22
10-04-2006, 07:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Silver Lining, WTO?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] UK may offer up some token resistance, but it won't have any substance [/ QUOTE ] Oh we'll happily have a go. Gordon Brown is the guy who legislated to bring the sites on shore (watch for news on this v soon) and he has a leadership election coming up in the next year and will want to put some distance between the US and UK to appeal to his party's roots. Championing free trade is the perfect story for him as it also reassures the right of the party whilst bashing Bush- especially as he will be talking tough for Africa at the same time appealing to the left. EU is getting stroppy even over flight information we'll happily do it for poker. Poker would be a low priority but it's a sure fire win so will be used as a stick. [/ QUOTE ] Gambling is a dirty word. Internet gambling is even dirtier. I really can't see any British politician making to much of a song and dance about protecting the right to gamble as it's not a vote winner. That said Labour did relax, and continue to do so, the gambling laws in Britain. [/ QUOTE ] Oh no doubt he will leave it to the officials and stick it on Peter Mandelson's desk at the EU (he always hated him anyway) but that's what the EU is for - to do the things that the politicians don't want to front up to in front of their electorate, they'll just stay quiet and let the EU take the (limited) flack. Meanwhile Gordon will bank Party's tax cheques which amusingly might make the UK government itself break this law. Here in the UK we are a lot more relaxed about gambling. We have a bookie's office on pretty much every high street, we have a national lottery funding "good causes" including the 2012 Olympics and we don't have loads of evangelicals. Plus the City is a very powerful lobby and they want the listings and they want the EU to have revenge on the US for denting their bonuses with this law.
|
|
#24
10-11-2006, 09:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Silver Lining, WTO?
The problem here is perspective. To us, this is a very large issue that affects us personally. Most other people just don't care. This is the primary roadblock to a domestic overturn of the Gambling rider in addition to any international action against the U.S.
Nobody is going to take a stand against the U.S. over poker. This is why Antigua can win inside of the framework of the WTO but have zero solvency on actually changing policy in the U.S. As iron said, the only enforcement that exists is either a) self-imposed: U.S. citizens get pissed and demand the law change, or b) other countries sanction the U.S. This issue is simply too small for most of America to care about or for other countries to risk GDP over. I think the best option for players is to just keep playing. As I understand it, the law's enforcement targets banks and poker sites, not users. Assuming this is the case, you are at no personal risk using sites that still service US Customers. Just as nobody cares about overturning this, nobody cares much about enforcing it either. This was largely a midterm election ploy to mobilize the conservative base, and I doubt many state resources are going to be diverted towards tracking EFTs and the like. I *am* interested in seeing what type of legal standing there is for suing the U.S. gov't. That might be the only way a special interest can get the law changed.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
