Risk that poker site employees could be arrested at the WSOP?

[Oblomov]

[ QUOTE ]
Rather than just sit back on a whim that they never will prosecute, I'd rather see some kind of momentum generated from the poker community that will carry some kind of influcence to congress and hopefully change the gov.'s perspective of poker in general.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wise words. However I think it is the online poker industry that needs to organise some sort of a lobby first and foremost. With the amount of money these companies are raking in, you would expect them to spend some of it on making sure that their main player base (US citizens) does not come under threat as a result of tightened legislation.

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Rather than just sit back on a whim that they never will prosecute, I'd rather see some kind of momentum generated from the poker community that will carry some kind of influcence to congress and hopefully change the gov.'s perspective of poker in general.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wise words. However I think it is the online poker industry that needs to organise some sort of a lobby first and foremost. With the amount of money these companies are raking in, you would expect them to spend some of it on making sure that their main player base (US citizens) does not come under threat as a result of tightened legislation.

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you've hit the nail on the head. Problem is that PartyGaming has done little but stick their tongue out at the U.S. Gov. and folded their arms w/ mocking glare. IF other Internet "giants" (PartGaming would have to be a "super-giant" then [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]) would do something like what is being discussed in this thread, that would be IDEAL!! So, here's where the players come in. It would take sacrifice and commitment, but we do have a bit of the upperhand when it comes to these sites (no customer no business). It is also in their best interest to pursue something like what we have dicussed and the players are their greatest allies and "evidence" when it comes to legal hearings between these Sites and the U.S. Gov.

I'm still waiting for a "qualified-someone" to spearhead this and get it moving.

[memphis57]

[ QUOTE ]
Problem is that PartyGaming has done little but stick their tongue out at the U.S. Gov. and folded their arms w/ mocking glare.


[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting, I didn't know this. Any details? I would have thought they would have been all over this with top Wash lobbyist talent, several favorite senators and a proper submissive-but-insistent-on-their-rights type attitude. It's too bad if they're making things worse by not playing the game.

Oh, well, if that's the case now then I predict a change after they are public. This has such obvious implications for the value of the stock that securities analysts will be all over it, and management of companies tend to eventually come around to focusing on isues of concern to investors.

I presume there's nothing illegal about owning PartyGaming by US entities? If that's true, then I would expect US ownership to grow pretty good in the next few years, which in turn creates a powerful force both to pressure the company to be nice and persuade the US state and federal governments to talk to them.

jrbick, are you in the US or GB? Thanks for your various posts on the need to press for legalization. When you say
[ QUOTE ]
I'm still waiting for a "qualified-someone" to spearhead this and get it moving.

[/ QUOTE ]
do you mean someone here on 2+2, or someone in the gaming industry? And could you expand a little on what you think would be entailed in getting it moving? Would stuff like targeted email campaigns help? With the membership base here, I expect we could easily do things like flood some congresspeople's email with pro-legalization messages, if someone here would take the lead in determining who to target and when to do it.

[bkholdem]

The rationale for having internet poker sites spearhead efforts to legalize internet poker is reasonable.

However, another point of view is this:

If Party Gaming, etc., whatver were to take charge of this and loby for it the powers that be in the US Gov't can easily argue "internet gambling is bad, here's xyz examples of people who went broke and in debt because of big bad party poker, et al... now they are tying to make it legal... they are getting rich putting our citizens in debt, it's exploitation"

However, if a PLAYER'S ASSOCIATION were to take charge in organizing and lobbying, etc it takes that argument away from the government. 5 Million (or however many) tax paying americans going to congress with the intention of making online poker playing legal would be much more powerful.

I'd pay $20 bucks a year in dues or whatever to an organization whose primary objective (or a main objective) was to impact the US Gov't to legalize online poker.

I've heard there is some type of players accociation but I know nothing about it. Are they involved in any type of way? Would they be willing to get involved? Anyone know?

Some business professional could start something like this if they have relevant experience.

Thoughts? What do people in the know say?

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you've hit the nail on the head. Problem is that PartyGaming has done little but stick their tongue out at the U.S. Gov. and folded their arms w/ mocking glare.

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason for this is because the US government has repeatedly shown its unwillingness to act in a reasonable or rational way. This is because they know that US citizens will basically agree and follow unquestioningly any law they set, no matter how restrictive and controlling it is. Time for the people of America to stand up for the right to make their own mistakes, and stop cow-towing. Land of the free indeed.

Regards Mack

[jrbick]

Interesting, I didn't know this. Any details? I would have thought they would have been all over this with top Wash lobbyist talent, several favorite senators and a proper submissive-but-insistent-on-their-rights type attitude.

Read the article from the NYT that Granny posted in this thread.

I presume there's nothing illegal about owning PartyGaming by US entities? If that's true, then I would expect US ownership to grow pretty good in the next few years, which in turn creates a powerful force both to pressure the company to be nice and persuade the US state and federal governments to talk to them.

Again, read the article and also see www.freejaycohen.com The USDOJ begs to differ. They aren't going out to seek them, but if they step foot inside the U.S. they will be nabbed (according to USDOJ).

jrbick, are you in the US or GB?

U.S.

do you mean someone here on 2+2, or someone in the gaming industry? And could you expand a little on what you think would be entailed in getting it moving?

The answer to this is up to everyone here. I don't know how these things work, exactly. I have to think that there is a more effective and professional route than emailing congress, though.
See this thread as well in the News/Views/Gossip forum. Roy Cooke is speaking to tournament players specifically, but I think there should be something more inclusive for all players that would be able to persuade congress in our favor. This is what another poster has already contributed to this thread (a player's association). I envision something similar to a player's association that would act similar to that of the PGA or something close to it. Show that we are serious about a game, about paying appropriate taxes, and that there is no difference between going broke playing poker than going broke playing the lottery (which State's endorse). The major issue aside from the Federal spectrum is that of the State. The State spectrum is what I fear the most and will be the most difficult to persuade. But if something major happens on the Federal level, maybe States will follow suit (no pun intended) and realize the same things that the Feds would/will realize.

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]

If Party Gaming, etc., whatver were to take charge of this and loby for it the powers that be in the US Gov't can easily argue "internet gambling is bad, here's xyz examples of people who went broke and in debt because of big bad party poker, et al... now they are tying to make it legal... they are getting rich putting our citizens in debt, it's exploitation"

[/ QUOTE ]

A simple/reasonable rebuttle would be to point out the Fed. Gov.'s hypocrisy in those statements with Casinos, Horce/Dog racing, off-track betting parlors, lotteries, scratch tickets, etc. They may bring up gambling's addictive potential (which I disagree with). Rebuttal: alcohol, tobacco (esp. cigarettes). Yet they have done VERY little to put a stop to these addictive and life-threatening substances (other than tax the crap out of tobacco companies).

Here's what I'm really fearing/thinking: Although there are probably MANY issues, the U.S. may be against iPoker MOSTLY due to the fact that it is not receiving tax revenue from these companies. If they were, it'd be a different story. Thus my theory of an ideal involvement in this effort from iPoker companies.

Starting place: identify potential allies w/in congress (?).

[jrbick]

If anyone still doubts that it is illegal to play iPoker in almost every U.S. State, check out WPT's new iPoker site. No residents of the U.S. are allowed to play for real money.

http://www.wptonline.com/about/legal.do

[EStreet20]

Even if they had this intention, US Law Enforcement officers on any level would have no jurisdiction to make such an arrest. They operate those sites in an area where it is legal to do so.

A similar situation. A guy from NY goes to Vegas and visits the Bunny Ranch where he bangs a prostitute. Now when he returns home does an NYPD officer have the right to arrest him since prostitution is illegal in NY??? Definitely not, although his wife might blow his balls off with a shotgun.

Good luck,
Matt

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If Party Gaming, etc., whatver were to take charge of this and loby for it the powers that be in the US Gov't can easily argue "internet gambling is bad, here's xyz examples of people who went broke and in debt because of big bad party poker, et al... now they are tying to make it legal... they are getting rich putting our citizens in debt, it's exploitation"

[/ QUOTE ]

A simple/reasonable rebuttle would be to point out the Fed. Gov.'s hypocrisy in those statements with Casinos, Horce/Dog racing, off-track betting parlors, lotteries, scratch tickets, etc. They may bring up gambling's addictive potential (which I disagree with). Rebuttal: alcohol, tobacco (esp. cigarettes). Yet they have done VERY little to put a stop to these addictive and life-threatening substances (other than tax the crap out of tobacco companies).

Here's what I'm really fearing/thinking: Although there are probably MANY issues, the U.S. may be against iPoker MOSTLY due to the fact that it is not receiving tax revenue from these companies. If they were, it'd be a different story. Thus my theory of an ideal involvement in this effort from iPoker companies.

Starting place: identify potential allies w/in congress (?).

[/ QUOTE ]

We both seem to agree that there needs to be an organized effort. This takes leadership.

What is an online poker sites incentive to make internet gambling in the US legal? They are getting paid good money regardless.

I think it takes people in the know to hash out the issues, competing interests, etc. I personally don't care if it is legal or illegal as long as I continue to have access to it and continue to make money off of it. I know Roy Cooke asked Doyle to take some sort of leadership role in legitimizing poker but the dude is like 75yrs old or something. Is he really going to take a leadership role in a huge project like this? He's making enough money elsewhere. So is party et al.

I guess it isn't important enough or profitable enough for someone to invest their time and effort into.