NOW IS the time to seek declaratory relief for "poker", huh, PPA ?

[MiltonFriedman]

"iMEGA is already in court, so they will be able to get a result sooner than the PPA."

1. iMEGA is swinging, poorly, at every pitch of Constitutional law. They HAVE to do so. They NEED to hit a home run.

2. iMEGA is not carrying water for poker. They have NO poker plaintiffs

3. iMEGA is burdened with carrying water for sportsbooks, who are engaged in a business which any court anywhere in the US would find violates the Wire Act. (Actually, the Kaplan defense motions about the WTO trumping the Wire Act for past actions may do more good for sportsbooks than anything that iMEGA has done or will do.)

4. The PPA has real members it can point to, who are engaged in lawful online poker activities.

5. Poker does not need a "home run" of Constitutional proportions. I am not talking about some long-shot Constitutional challenge. Rather, the PPA should go fo a fairly straight forward action for declaratory relief regarding coverage or not under a couple of Federal Statutes, the UIGEA and the Wire Act.

6. Contrary to what G911 wrote about me, I have no axe to grind against iMEGA or the PPA. I think the PPA would make a wonderful lead plaintiff in litigating to protect the rights of poker players. It can even help everyone from epassporte to CardPlayer to Bluff by spearheading a "poker" legal action.