NJ Law Journal 8/27/07 -- Front Page Article on IMEGA Suit

[permafrost]

[ QUOTE ]
Also:

[ QUOTE ]
Cavanaugh noted that the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act exempts fantasy sports leagues where winning depends on participants' relative knowledge and skill and is determined by statistical results of multiple real-world sporting events and not on the performance of a single real-world team or single performance of an individual athlete.

[/ QUOTE ]

Anyone else find this statement odd?

[/ QUOTE ]

The term "exempts" should be "excludes" or “doesn’t include”. The term "exempts" implies a privilege or special favor which isn't factual. Overall the explanation is too compact but there were probably length considerations. What did you find odd?

[oldbookguy]

[ QUOTE ]
but this is unripe without the actual regulations to challenge.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I have said, you guys are all pretty smart and this ripeness issue is interesting.

Since the judge in Chuck Humphries case cited the UIGEA and used that to rule against his case, then would that not open the door to the ripness issue for IMEGA.

Though no one has been found guilty, the opposite is true, a not guilty verdict was given and suit brought and heard all without regulations.

Even though UIGEA excludes / exempts Fantasy Wagering there are still regulations to be adopted, even for this section that are not in place.

obg

[oldbookguy]

OK, here is the plan, though I am not the one to carry it out.

Reading the brief filed by Charles Humphrey:
http://techlawadvisor.com/docs/Reply%20Brief.pdf

It reads in part:
[ QUOTE ]
Each of the defendants operated
and promoted Internet-based fantasy sports leagues in which the participants
agree to pay a specified amount of money to participate; the determination of winners is based predominantly on chance rather than skill;,

[/ QUOTE ]


Now, the plan -

Who will first lose a substancial sum to other PLAYERS at a poker site, then SUE the site and lose since they would argue poker is a game of predominate skill than luck, thus we win?

obg

[Skallagrim]

Sorry OBG, I dont think any one out there knows how to sue a poker site: where are they located, how do you serve the papers? Since all site accepting Americans are offshore, thats a huge practical difficulty.

The reply brief linked was interesting, and makes me want to see the Judge's opinion even more...if he truly ignored the skill v. chance argument (which he had to address somehow), then at least in the jurisdiction where this judge sits, poker tourna - oops, I mean poker CONTESTS are indeed just as legal.

Skallagrim

[oldbookguy]

Actually it would not need to be a 'pure' poker site as we think of them, would not a poker 'club' work, such as chip vault, you pay a monthly fee and are given credits to play with that can be used to buy into tourneys. The more you build up your points, the higher value tourney you can enter but, you may end up as in our games, with nothing, no points and out the 19.95 monthly 'fee' you paid.

As the the link, I wish I could find the ruling online but the response brief was interesting and should give you some sort of insight.


obg

[MiltonFriedman]

What poker site would acquiesce to jurisdiction or accept service ?

[oldbookguy]

[ QUOTE ]
What poker site would acquiesce to jurisdiction or accept service ?

[/ QUOTE ]

one as mentioned above, a 'club' is:

www.clububt.com

ClubUBT
Prize Eligibility Department
PO Box 30488
Las Vegas, Nevada 89173

[Grasshopp3r]

Simple, just create a site for the express purpose of this exercise.

[MiltonFriedman]

That looks really stupid of them.

[oldbookguy]

Hey, they are not the only ones.

There are several, I just cannot find them right now.

obg