Allyn Jaffrey Shulman Says Internet Poker is LEGAL

cero_z · #1 10-10-2006, 12:25 PM

Hi Everyone,

The article linked below presents the most clearly reasoned argument for nothing major changing about online poker. She says Party Poker has acted too hastily, and that any site that pulls out of the US at this point is getting bad legal advice. Discuss.

OK, I'll start: she's Barry Shulman's wife, and is clearly pro-online poker. However, her reasoning seems very sound. What she doesn't address directly in her jurisdiction discussion is whether Party execs would be subject to arrest if they ventured into the US. Cardplayer Article

sputum · #2 10-10-2006, 12:30 PM

I'll go next.

What article?
[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] out-edited

Freerollin` · #3 10-10-2006, 12:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Everyone,

This article presents the most clearly reasoned argument for nothing major changing about online poker. She says Party Poker has acted too hastily, and that any site that pulls out of the US at this point is getting bad legal advice. Discuss.

OK, I'll start: she's Barry Shulman's wife, and is clearly pro-online poker. However, her reasoning seems very sound. What she doesn't address directly in her jurisdiction discussion is whether Party execs would be subject to arrest if they ventured into the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

She's also claimed that the US Constitution "protects your right to wire your money to 3rd parties, including Neteller." This, of course, is nonsense.

I'm a lawyer, and I wouldn't believe something because she says it is true (it may be true, but her opinion is worthless, IMO).

Kneel B4 Zod · #4 10-10-2006, 12:32 PM

well there is a qualified, unbiased source of news.

I wouldn't trust Cardplayers news or opinions on anything - they've been shills to the highest bidder for a while now.

xorpheous · #5 10-10-2006, 12:37 PM

I'm not sure that "legal" would be the right phrase. Ambiguous would be better. The ultimate deciding factor regarding the legality of online poker will be made in the courts. How judges interperet the game and how current laws relate to the game will determine its legality. Right now, there's no absolutely clear position. Hopefully one good thing that may come out of the passing of the UIGEA are some solid court cases on the matter. With some explicit judgments in favor of online poker, our positions as players will be a lot more secure.

Wahoo73 · #6 10-10-2006, 12:40 PM

Also, as discussed ad nauseum in another thread last week, she conveniently avoids discussing states' laws regarding internet gambling and the enforcement provisions that the UIGEA puts in place for those states' laws. Apparently, this has already had a negative impact in at least one state, Louisiana, with one poker site, Hollywood Poker.

poorolrich · #7 10-10-2006, 12:41 PM

Well, I have said it before and I will say it again---It doesn't matter what we- or the 'experts'- think. It only matters what the Gaming sites think.

lfairban · #8 10-10-2006, 01:57 PM

It sounds as if the courts have already ruled:

"Judge Duvall ruled that the Wire Act only prohibited wagering on sports events and he dismissed all 33 cases, noting that “Comparing the face of the Wire Act and the history surrounding its enactment with the recently proposed legislation, it becomes more certain that the Wire Act's prohibition of gambling activities is restricted to the types of events enumerated in the statute, sporting events or contests.” In other words, online poker was not within the reach of the Wire Act’s prohibition. The District Court of Appeal agreed with Duvall’s ruling that the 1961 Wire Act does not apply to online poker."

cero_z · #9 10-10-2006, 02:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
well there is a qualified, unbiased source of news.

I wouldn't trust Cardplayers news or opinions on anything - they've been shills to the highest bidder for a while now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Irrelevant, and already mentioned. You play poker, right? What about her reasoning? Can anyone fill me in on whether the execs of an offshore online poker site would be facing prosecution if they were in the US on vacation, for example?

cero_z · #10 10-10-2006, 02:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Also, as discussed ad nauseum in another thread last week, she conveniently avoids discussing states' laws regarding internet gambling and the enforcement provisions that the UIGEA puts in place for those states' laws. Apparently, this has already had a negative impact in at least one state, Louisiana, with one poker site, Hollywood Poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

link? How many states besides WA have anti-online gaming laws?