Home / Community / Forum / Support Area / Poker News /

Bankers and Processors mount a defence to Online poker

Old
Default
Bankers and Processors mount a defence to Online poker - Mon Oct 03, 2011, 07:40 PM
(#1)
brkn80's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 440
http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanva...-legal-papers/

Just came across this while surfing.

sorry peeps but the link isn't working.I will try to get one that works


http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanva...-legal-papers/

Last edited by brkn80; Mon Oct 03, 2011 at 07:45 PM.. Reason: link doesn't work
 
Old
Default
Mon Oct 03, 2011, 07:42 PM
(#2)
effsea's Avatar
Since: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,609
yo dude,

shouldn't you be taking care of the mrs.

.......hiccup
 
Old
Default
Mon Oct 03, 2011, 07:52 PM
(#4)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Good read brkn,thanks.

I've said it all along and I'll say it again---I don't know how this will all end and what the landscape of on-line poker looks like for US players in particular when it does,but whatever happens I doubt seriously,as I have from the beginning,that it will end in a courtroom. The DOJ's case has been,and remains,a joke.
 
Old
Default
Mon Oct 03, 2011, 07:54 PM
(#5)
mcrissinger's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,650
BronzeStar
“PokerStars and Full Tilt are not ‘illegal gambling businesses’ under IGBA because they are not ‘gambling businesses’ at all,” says one of the legal filings. “To be ‘engaged in the business of betting or wagering’ requires that the business has a stake in the outcome of gambling contests, and the Indictment here fails to allege that the poker companies had any such stake.”

Well... PokerStars isn't. Full Tilt was gambling that nobody would ever try to cash out. And they lost.

edit: Looks like they've got a pretty solid position there. Moxie, look! We're gonna be playing again soon!(hopefully.)

edit again: awwww, Moxie beat me.

Last edited by mcrissinger; Mon Oct 03, 2011 at 07:58 PM..
 
Old
Default
Mon Oct 03, 2011, 08:06 PM
(#6)
hemetdennis's Avatar
Since: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,019
BronzeStar
...


Last edited by hemetdennis; Mon Oct 03, 2011 at 08:09 PM..
 
Old
Thumbs up
Woo hoo - Mon Oct 03, 2011, 08:17 PM
(#7)
gmanwicksy's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 861
Hope to see u US players back soon,,,
 
Old
Default
Mon Oct 03, 2011, 08:19 PM
(#8)
PaidInFull6's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 342
By filing this the bankers and processors are not disputing that they did in fact process the payments and facilitate the flow of funds between U.S.-based players and online poker companies, but rather that the laws do not apply to them because poker is a game of skill. That argument is highly controversial because it's been long debated whether poker is a game of skill or gambling like other casino games. The fact that the processors are not even trying to dispute whether they processed payment or not leads me to believe that the DOJ has them nailed with hard evidence as far as that is concerned. I'm disappointed by this, it will be incredibly difficult to prove poker is a game of skill because of the enormous luck factor that is unquestionably present in the game, and at the end of the day whether you think poker is a game of skill or not will be a matter of opinion which will vary from person to person.
 
Old
Default
Mon Oct 03, 2011, 08:24 PM
(#9)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrissinger View Post
“PokerStars and Full Tilt are not ‘illegal gambling businesses’ under IGBA because they are not ‘gambling businesses’ at all,” says one of the legal filings. “To be ‘engaged in the business of betting or wagering’ requires that the business has a stake in the outcome of gambling contests, and the Indictment here fails to allege that the poker companies had any such stake.”

Well... PokerStars isn't. Full Tilt was gambling that nobody would ever try to cash out. And they lost.

edit: Looks like they've got a pretty solid position there. Moxie, look! We're gonna be playing again soon!(hopefully.)

edit again: awwww, Moxie beat me.

I'm not going to go quite that far MC. I still think at the end of the day that we'll need to see legislation setting on-line poker up as licensed and regulated (independently regulated...) before we're back playing again. But this could speed up that process some and that would be a good thing for sure. I also think that this ups the likeliehood that PStars will be involved in the landscape when this all shakes out (not a slam dunk no,but any thing that helps is welcome).

One thing I've been interested in about this entire process is whether the US Government was collecting taxes from the banks and processors that they summarily accused of bank and wire fraud. If that's the case then I say it's high time for some ambitious prosecutor type to file co-conspirator charges against the US Government.

And someone please take "Dr." (lmao---effing quack that he is...) Bill Frist out back and beat the chit out of him.
 
Old
Default
Mon Oct 03, 2011, 08:37 PM
(#10)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaidInFull6 View Post
By filing this the bankers and processors are not disputing that they did in fact process the payments and facilitate the flow of funds between U.S.-based players and online poker companies, but rather that the laws do not apply to them because poker is a game of skill. That argument is highly controversial because it's been long debated whether poker is a game of skill or gambling like other casino games. The fact that the processors are not even trying to dispute whether they processed payment or not leads me to believe that the DOJ has them nailed with hard evidence as far as that is concerned. I'm disappointed by this, it will be incredibly difficult to prove poker is a game of skill because of the enormous luck factor that is unquestionably present in the game, and at the end of the day whether you think poker is a game of skill or not will be a matter of opinion which will vary from person to person.

Paid that's not the gist of their argument. The argument they are making is that the poker sites were not gambling sites as the law defines because no matter who won or lost it was immaterial to the sites,they made their money via rake and had NO vested interest in any outcome of any game on their sites. The were the host,NOT the house,like a casino would be.

And that is why the US Government took the path to get at them that they did---over the accountancy methods of paying their US customers,to wit bank and wire fraud (as the government sees it).

Well for those charges to have any merit they're going to need to show an party,or parties,who have been damaged by dealing with the processing of the sites transactions. Bet your ass if the Banks of America's and the rest of the world had been getting beat out of THEIR processing fees they would have cried bloody murder long before now. And as I said in my last post---I would love to know of the government has been collecting taxes from these banks and processors all along. Anyone care to bet against that?

They knew this was bullchit 5+ years ago and that's why they "passed" UIGEA as a rider on the Port Security Act in the first place. Turnabout being fair play I would love to see Harry Reid stick a bill declaring on-line poker legal on any measure agreed to by the Congress pertaining to the Debt Commission and see if the Puritans in this country are willing to sink THAT legislation on the altar of on-line poker.
 
Old
Default
Mon Oct 03, 2011, 09:50 PM
(#11)
hemetdennis's Avatar
Since: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,019
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moxie Pip View Post
Paid that's not the gist of their argument. The argument they are making is that the poker sites were not gambling sites as the law defines because no matter who won or lost it was immaterial to the sites,they made their money via rake and had NO vested interest in any outcome of any game on their sites. The were the host,NOT the house,like a casino would be.

And that is why the US Government took the path to get at them that they did---over the accountancy methods of paying their US customers,to wit bank and wire fraud (as the government sees it).

Well for those charges to have any merit they're going to need to show an party,or parties,who have been damaged by dealing with the processing of the sites transactions. Bet your ass if the Banks of America's and the rest of the world had been getting beat out of THEIR processing fees they would have cried bloody murder long before now. And as I said in my last post---I would love to know of the government has been collecting taxes from these banks and processors all along. Anyone care to bet against that?

They knew this was bullchit 5+ years ago and that's why they "passed" UIGEA as a rider on the Port Security Act in the first place. Turnabout being fair play I would love to see Harry Reid stick a bill declaring on-line poker legal on any measure agreed to by the Congress pertaining to the Debt Commission and see if the Puritans in this country are willing to sink THAT legislation on the altar of on-line poker.
OK LETS SEE DO WE REALLY WANT CONGRESS TO PASS ANYTHING ??
AS I SEE IT IF THE CASE IS DISMISSED THEN EVERYTHING GOES BACK TO HOW IT WAS BEFORE BLACK FRIDAY EXCEPT THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO DEPOSIT WITHOUT ALL THE BULL
SO I'M HOPE CONGRESS DOES NOTHING

AND THEY DON'T NEED TO SHOW THE BANKS WERE HURT IF YOU JAY WALK YOU DON'T HAVE TO GET HIT TO BE GUILTY. BUT IF THEY ARE NOT GAMBLING SITES THEN THERE WAS NO LAW BROKEN

SO HOPEFULLY THIS WILL GET DISMISSED IN THE NEXT 3 OR 4 MONTHS


 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 04, 2011, 03:45 AM
(#12)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by hemetdennis View Post
OK LETS SEE DO WE REALLY WANT CONGRESS TO PASS ANYTHING ??
AS I SEE IT IF THE CASE IS DISMISSED THEN EVERYTHING GOES BACK TO HOW IT WAS BEFORE BLACK FRIDAY EXCEPT THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO DEPOSIT WITHOUT ALL THE BULL
SO I'M HOPE CONGRESS DOES NOTHING

AND THEY DON'T NEED TO SHOW THE BANKS WERE HURT IF YOU JAY WALK YOU DON'T HAVE TO GET HIT TO BE GUILTY. BUT IF THEY ARE NOT GAMBLING SITES THEN THERE WAS NO LAW BROKEN

SO HOPEFULLY THIS WILL GET DISMISSED IN THE NEXT 3 OR 4 MONTHS



I don't think that will pass muster Dennis as any court decision in this will quite possibly indeed be a dismissal. But what does that do really?

Just puts everything right back into the grey area all the sites were operating under prior to BF in the first place. And then the industry is stuck waiting for the next ambitious DA or stick-up-the ass Puritan politician to take the time to uncouple with his hooker and/or congressional page and come riding to our "rescue".

Think about it...Would you want to operate,as a site,under those conditions again? Not sure I would,could be looking at a constant start and go scenario dealing with this BS that way.
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 04, 2011, 04:33 AM
(#13)
cjrocknroll's Avatar
Since: Jan 2011
Posts: 34
Lol I think u will find full tilt are ilegal gambling bolox now as they have had there licence totally revoked forever and about time aswell and Howard Lederer should be jailed and his m8 Chris Ferguson
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 04, 2011, 06:44 AM
(#14)
hemetdennis's Avatar
Since: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,019
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moxie Pip View Post
I don't think that will pass muster Dennis as any court decision in this will quite possibly indeed be a dismissal. But what does that do really?

Just puts everything right back into the grey area all the sites were operating under prior to BF in the first place. And then the industry is stuck waiting for the next ambitious DA or stick-up-the ass Puritan politician to take the time to uncouple with his hooker and/or congressional page and come riding to our "rescue".

Think about it...Would you want to operate,as a site,under those conditions again? Not sure I would,could be looking at a constant start and go scenario dealing with this BS that way.
BUT YOUR MISSING THE REASON FOR THE DISMISSAL WILL BE THAT THEY ARE NOT GAMBLING SITES SO THEY CAN NOT BE CHARGED BY ANYONE UNDER ANY CURRENT LAW
SO NO GREY AREA ANYMORE, SO THE BANKS CAN DO YOUR DEPOSITS.
IF CONGRESS GETS IN IT YOU WILL LIKELY HAVE TO SEND IN A SAMPLE OF YOUR DNA JUST TO PLAY

 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 04, 2011, 08:57 AM
(#15)
Cairn Destop's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,477
BronzeStar
Unless something changed in this case in the last few days, it hasn't progressed. As I understand it, the charges are yet to be finalized. According to another news service posted on this forum, they amended the charges against Full Tilt to define their actions as a Ponzi scheme.

This article has the banks offering their defense. Since we are seeing just the one side, it sounds like a slam-dunk. Or to put it in poker terms, the banks are holding pocket aces. I would love to know the prosecution's response, we just might find out they are holding a straight-flush.

Thing is, the case hasn't even gotten to the courts yet. This case is still in the preliminary stage of filing the charges. Again, to put it in poker terms, the hole cards have been distributed, but nobody has started the bidding. Everyone is still looking at their hand. No railbird, (politician), is going to disturb the peace until there is something happening.

Since lawyers prefer delaying everything, I'm thinking the earliest time for this to reach a courtroom is sometime during the spring of 2013. Anticipate lots of maneuvers between now and then, but nothing substantial happening.

Regarding the issue of poker being a game of chance, that is obvious to me. Yes, the game relies on skill, but the distribution of the cards is random, which is the definition of chance. We have all been on both sides of the luck factor, and luck is another word for chance favoring us. It might be true that the poker sites are not casinoes, but that changes little.
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 04, 2011, 10:12 AM
(#16)
RockerguyAA's Avatar
Since: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,089
BronzeStar
Ok the whole 'we're not a gambling site because we only use rake' seems kind of weak to me. Sounds like it is mostly just a technicality in the wording of the definition of gambling companies. Not too much of a difference between a slot machine paying out 95% and a pot being raked 5% (in the long run anyways). Don't really know what I'm talking about though, just my 2c.


Hey paidinfull6 - I don't really think there is much debate going on whether or not poker is a game of skill. All you have to do is google Nanonoko's cash game profits graph or Leatherass' graph, etc. Perfectly clear and irrefutable proof of someone using their 'skill edge' to win lots and lots of money over hundreds of thousands or even millions of hands.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hemetdennis View Post
OK LETS SEE DO WE REALLY WANT CONGRESS TO PASS ANYTHING ??
AS I SEE IT IF THE CASE IS DISMISSED THEN EVERYTHING GOES BACK TO HOW IT WAS BEFORE BLACK FRIDAY EXCEPT THAT WE WILL BE ABLE TO DEPOSIT WITHOUT ALL THE BULL
SO I'M HOPE CONGRESS DOES NOTHING
Oh how I wish that would happen! I'd probably go running in the streets in my underwear screaming like I just won the lottery or something

Last edited by RockerguyAA; Tue Oct 04, 2011 at 10:15 AM..
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 04, 2011, 10:22 AM
(#17)
hemetdennis's Avatar
Since: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,019
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cairn Destop View Post
Unless something changed in this case in the last few days, it hasn't progressed. As I understand it, the charges are yet to be finalized. According to another news service posted on this forum, they amended the charges against Full Tilt to define their actions as a Ponzi scheme.

This article has the banks offering their defense. Since we are seeing just the one side, it sounds like a slam-dunk. Or to put it in poker terms, the banks are holding pocket aces. I would love to know the prosecution's response, we just might find out they are holding a straight-flush.

Thing is, the case hasn't even gotten to the courts yet. This case is still in the preliminary stage of filing the charges. Again, to put it in poker terms, the hole cards have been distributed, but nobody has started the bidding. Everyone is still looking at their hand. No railbird, (politician), is going to disturb the peace until there is something happening.

Since lawyers prefer delaying everything, I'm thinking the earliest time for this to reach a courtroom is sometime during the spring of 2013. Anticipate lots of maneuvers between now and then, but nothing substantial happening.

Regarding the issue of poker being a game of chance, that is obvious to me. Yes, the game relies on skill, but the distribution of the cards is random, which is the definition of chance. We have all been on both sides of the luck factor, and luck is another word for chance favoring us. It might be true that the poker sites are not casinoes, but that changes little.
CHARGES HAVE BEEN FILED NOW THEY ARE FILING MOTIONS TO THE COURT, SO IT'S IN THE COURTS NOW NEXT THE D.A. WILL ASK THE COURT NOT TO DISMISS THE CASE.
SO AS I SAID BEFORE WHEN THE JUDGE DISMISSES THE CHARGES DUE TO POKER IS NOT ONE OF THE 9 GAMES LISTED IN THE LAW AND IS A GAME OF SKILL THEN POKERSTARS WILL BE ABLE TO HAVE U.S. PLAYERS

BUT TELL ME EVERY TIME YOU WIN A HAND IT IS DUE TO LUCK AND NO SKILL AT ALL ??

A POKER SITE IS IN NO WAY THE SAME AS A CASINO, AND THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING.



 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 04, 2011, 02:27 PM
(#18)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by hemetdennis View Post
BUT YOUR MISSING THE REASON FOR THE DISMISSAL WILL BE THAT THEY ARE NOT GAMBLING SITES SO THEY CAN NOT BE CHARGED BY ANYONE UNDER ANY CURRENT LAW
SO NO GREY AREA ANYMORE, SO THE BANKS CAN DO YOUR DEPOSITS.
IF CONGRESS GETS IN IT YOU WILL LIKELY HAVE TO SEND IN A SAMPLE OF YOUR DNA JUST TO PLAY


No,I'm not missing the reason at all Dennis. But just because one judge and/or court MAY dismiss the charges (that hasn't happened yet and just because we all want it to doesn't make it so...) doesn't mean that the DA can't appeal. Or another DA in another state or district could possibly file (what if a DA in Washington state did considering the legislatures negative opinion of on-line poker in that state for instance?...).

In my opinion the only way this gets settled to everyone's satisfaction (except the Puritans and they can go eff themselves,or more accurately their cousins and siblings...) is for a final,concrete decision to be made. I'm confident that said decision will be for legal,licensed,regulated on-line poker. I think that the news that the entities that helped Stars process payment to their customers have decided to fight back only ups the chances that Stars MAY be a part of that scene. Full Tilt and Ultimate Bet I think we most obviously NOT be a part of the landscape,nor should they be IMO.

And I also recognize that there may still be individual states that outlaw on-line poker for residents in their state,but I have a feeling that if the Federal government makes it a licensed,regulated industry that is less likely to be the case.
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 04, 2011, 02:31 PM
(#19)
Moxie Pip's Avatar
Since: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cairn Destop View Post
Unless something changed in this case in the last few days, it hasn't progressed. As I understand it, the charges are yet to be finalized. According to another news service posted on this forum, they amended the charges against Full Tilt to define their actions as a Ponzi scheme.

This article has the banks offering their defense. Since we are seeing just the one side, it sounds like a slam-dunk. Or to put it in poker terms, the banks are holding pocket aces. I would love to know the prosecution's response, we just might find out they are holding a straight-flush.

Thing is, the case hasn't even gotten to the courts yet. This case is still in the preliminary stage of filing the charges. Again, to put it in poker terms, the hole cards have been distributed, but nobody has started the bidding. Everyone is still looking at their hand. No railbird, (politician), is going to disturb the peace until there is something happening.

Since lawyers prefer delaying everything, I'm thinking the earliest time for this to reach a courtroom is sometime during the spring of 2013. Anticipate lots of maneuvers between now and then, but nothing substantial happening.

Regarding the issue of poker being a game of chance, that is obvious to me. Yes, the game relies on skill, but the distribution of the cards is random, which is the definition of chance. We have all been on both sides of the luck factor, and luck is another word for chance favoring us. It might be true that the poker sites are not casinoes, but that changes little.


You're still operating under the assumption that this case ever sees the inside of a courtroom. I still say that it never happens.
 
Old
Default
Tue Oct 04, 2011, 03:27 PM
(#20)
Cairn Destop's Avatar
Since: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,477
BronzeStar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moxie Pip View Post
And I also recognize that there may still be individual states that outlaw on-line poker for residents in their state,but I have a feeling that if the Federal government makes it a licensed,regulated industry that is less likely to be the case.

Isn't Maryland one of those states? Personally, I cannot understand how the states can call it illegal if the federal government eventually calls it legal. I'm thinking it a restraint of international trade. It would be as if a resident from a state that declared drinking illegal went to another state, drank a beer, and when he returned to his home state, was arrested for it.

As to the claim I made regarding when it gets inside the courtroom, that leaves a lot of time for the out of court maneuvers that could result in the case being dismissed. Right now, I'm thinking the worse case scenario is that the courts limit their rulings to the criminal charges of money laundrying and sidesteps the entire issue regarding online poker's legal status.

If the charges don't define online poker as illegal, then we could have a ruling that leaves everyone guessing as to online poker's status. Even if there is something in the court documents regarding its status, the parties might evade that part of the issue. Depending on the judge, they might accept such a motion as it "clarifies the issues before the court."
 

Getting PokerStars is easy: download and install the PokerStars game software, create your free player account, and validate your email address. Clicking on the download poker button will lead to the installation of compatible poker software on your PC of 51.7 MB, which will enable you to register and play poker on the PokerStars platform. To uninstall PokerStars use the Windows uninstaller: click Start > Control Panel and then select Add or Remove programs > Select PokerStars and click Uninstall or Remove.

Copyright (c) PokerSchoolOnline.com. All rights reserved, Rational Group, Douglas Bay Complex, King Edward Road, Onchan, Isle of Man, IM3 1DZ. You can email us on support@pokerschoolonline.com