For EVERYONE Who Thinks that iPoker is Safe From the U.S. Gov.

[jrbick]

I challenge you to read the sections of this report at http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ngisc...s/fullrpt.html
that are specific to Internet Gambling.

We need to organize and be PRO-ACTIVE if we are to believe that iPoker will continue in America.

Please do not dismiss this post as another "chicken-little-type-post." That attitude will ultimately leave iPoker in the dust. Since (as far as we know) the sites that we play at (and pay generously) have done little to be pro-active in winning over the U.S. Gov., we as players ought to step up to the plate.

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ngisc...s/fullrpt.html

[Cubswin]

Ive already read this document more then a couple of times. The final draft was published in 1999. A lot of progress has been made since then... eh? Kyl's bill has been around for even longer... 1995 to be exact. Has it even come close to passing? Lots of paranoia on this board the last few days.

cubs

[MicroBob]

Thanks for the clarification Cubs.

I'm not sure whether I've read the linked stuff or not because I didn't bother checking it.
But I think I get the general gist of what's in it.


Yes...I think it's safe to say that we've made 'just a little' bit of progress since 1999.

Since 2003 online-poker in the U.S. has become quite main-stream. Strangers I meet who learn that I do it professionally mostly mention that they like the play-money tables at Yahoo or that they play also or have a friend who likes to play also and would love to meet me.


There are so many people who have heard of Chris Moneymaker...and many of those do understand that he is a nobody who bought-in for $40 online and won his seat to the WSOP that way.
Most of the people who know about this have no moral qualms with it.


I think things are actually going in the opposite direction of what the poster is concerned about.
North Dakota is trying to officially legalize it.
Great Britain has the IPO for Party forthcoming on the LSX (and already has other online-poker and gamling companies being publicly traded such as crypto and paradise/sporting-bet).
No...it's not America...but if it's tolerated and accepted in Great Britain then I think that actually DOES help the cause in the U.S.

And then there's the whole bit about WPT Enterprises...and Doyle trying to buy it out and WPTE starting their online-poker games...etc etc.

On top of that...there are just fewer and fewer stories about the 'evils of online-gambling'.
and there are more and more positive stories about 1100+ players qualifying via WSOP...people 'accidentally' entering a WSOP qualifier and making it...and virtually all of these stories are written in such a way that it seems completely acceptable to play poker on the internet (there is ZERO reference of the grey-area of legality).

On top of that...we've got all the online-sites advertising on TV again via the dot-net method (or just wearing a logo for the site without any dot-net or dot-com attached to it).


seems to me like it's becoming more and more acceptable and mainstream every day.

[jrbick]

I agree that it is currently healthy (understatement of the year), MicroBob. It would be ridiculous for me or anyone to doubt this fact [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] . The growth rate of iPoker is astronomical! And seriously, I'm not trying to cause hysteria among the community either.

However, we have ONE state (ND) attempting to channel the industry into state income VERSUS how many states that have ALREADY specifically prohibited iGambling (iPoker)? WPTE is indeed launching new software for online play, but read it's T/C's -- NO U.S. CITIZEN IS ALLOWED TO PLAY FOR MONEY ON IT. My hope is that Doyle's attempt to purchase it will somehow turn into some sort of political process.

And really, though the report is 1999, you know how political process works -- a year means very little in political terms.

I would rather see a pro-active response from players rather than one that is passive. A passive response does nothing in terms of preserving our game. Just thinking in terms of "best possible" here. Why would we sit and do nothing? Wouldn't one think that the bigger this industry gets, the higher up it will land on the Federal priority list?

Any ideas aside from the usual "they won't prosecute" and "there's too many of us" and/or "the industry's too big now?"

[ds914]

[ QUOTE ]
Any ideas aside from the usual "they won't prosecute" and "there's too many of us" and/or "the industry's too big now?"

[/ QUOTE ]

You also have to realize that no one is going to take the threat too seriously until there's a real threat of enforcement and even prosecution. I know that if the US starts to crack down on internet poker, there's absolutely no way I'm going to jail for my past play. If it gets serious, I'll just quit playing. I think that's why most people aren't so concerned -- at least those of us who derive most of our income from a nonpoker job.

At this point, I'd rather players not take a pro-active response. Why bring even more light to it? Why fuel a legal battle that's luckily not yet developed?

[Cubswin]

At this point, I'd rather players not take a pro-active response. Why bring even more light to it? Why fuel a legal battle that's luckily not yet developed?

i agree 110%

You also have to realize that no one is going to take the threat too seriously until there's a real threat of enforcement and even prosecution

to further your point, the US fed govt has very little power to enforce a ban on internet poker under current statute. there is no US federal statute that makes internet poker illegal. the courts have held that the wire act, the one piece of legislation that the feds might point to in stating that internet poker is illegal, only applies to sports betting.

enforcement is unlikely to come at the state level either as they wouldnt have the first clue on how to go about it...plus most states are broke and dont have the budgets to do so.

cubs

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]

At this point, I'd rather players not take a pro-active response. Why bring even more light to it? Why fuel a legal battle that's luckily not yet developed?

[/ QUOTE ]


Exactly.
If everyone starts screaming, "Make it legal!!" then we will have a bunch of casual-players suddenly realize, "huh?? This isn't legal??" and will stop playing.
Additionally....it might bring more do-gooders to the battle to try to 'save us all' from this hoorible evil.

If we just continue to get publicity about it like we are now...that is that this a completely common and acceptable part of our culture...then it won't occur to as many people to even CONSIDER that they actually might think it is unacceptable.


Mass acceptance with ZERO reference to the legal grey-area is exactly what we want.

[Luv2DriveTT]

Step one: US cracks down

Step two: Foreign nations appeal to the WTO for a ruling on behalf of their companies

Step three: WTO rules that the US's restriction of gambling using foreign companies is against fair trade rules since the US has casinos. US has 1 to 5 years to rectify or be sanctioned

Step four: Us (as usual) sends out a defiant press release, and then backs down just before the sanctions hit. Case in point, the steel industry.

Worse case scenario - we get shut down for a few years.

TT [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Any ideas aside from the usual "they won't prosecute" and "there's too many of us" and/or "the industry's too big now?"

[/ QUOTE ]

You also have to realize that no one is going to take the threat too seriously until there's a real threat of enforcement and even prosecution. I know that if the US starts to crack down on internet poker, there's absolutely no way I'm going to jail for my past play. If it gets serious, I'll just quit playing. I think that's why most people aren't so concerned -- at least those of us who derive most of our income from a nonpoker job.

At this point, I'd rather players not take a pro-active response. Why bring even more light to it? Why fuel a legal battle that's luckily not yet developed?

[/ QUOTE ]

I suppose, then, that this topic wouldn't apply to someone such as yourself. Your observations are mostly correct, however. I just disagree that "hiding" would be effective. That'd be like an elephant trying to hide behind a lamp-post: it just ain't happenin'.

So, I aim this (naturally) towards those whom it should concern: professional and semi-professional (working to be professional) players.

Just trying to think long-term +EV for iPoker.

Thanks.

[Cubswin]

Step one: US cracks down

let's not get ahead of ourselves