DOJ sort of gives us an early Christmas gift!

[Crummy]

Didn't see this posted anywhere......but take a look!

Looks like the DOJ is making the Wire Act to ONLY sports betting, which is one step closer to online poker coming back to the US!

http://news.bluffmagazine.com/us-do...ire-act-only-applies-to-sports-betting-25683/

 

[Charade You Are]

I still want Holder to resign or be fired.

 

[waz666]

This won't make any immediate impact, but it is a step in the right direction.

 

[Charade You Are]

More news- http://www.pokernewsreport.com/absolute-poker-co-founder-guilty-in-plea-deal-6762

 

[ythelongface]

It sounds good on the surface, but nothing that says the UIGEA act will not be used against online poker now or in the future. I would like to be optimistic, but I dont know that this is going to mean a lot. It sounds like the Department of Justice is simply not going to use the Wire Act( which is a very antiquated law) to make its case against online poker.

 

[JamesDaBear]

The UIGEA has no backbone without the Wire Act. The UIGEA doesn't take a stand on anything that isn't covered in the Wire Act. Now that the Wire Act doesn't pertain to online poker, they'll need to come up with new legislation to cover prohibiting online poker.

 

[Crummy]

I agree with James..... from what I've been hearing they might be pulling the UIGEA or at least tweaking it to remove online poker.

 

[alaskabill]

Mighty fine of them to come to this conclusion right after they ran off the foreign competition that had a head start and hurt a lot of innocent people in the process.

Don't get me wrong this is really good news but what hypocrites they are.

 

[JOEBOB69]

So bottom line what is the end game of this?And how is it going to affect my near future of online poker in the U.S.?

 

[bbgold]

Web gambling gets boost from Obama administration

Will online poker in the states come back?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gambling-gets-boost-obama-administration-223603723.html?l=1

 

[pcgnome]

Well, just think about it. This is an election year, and the politicians are going to do what they can to get support from online poker players.

 

[dmorris68]

It sounds good on the surface, but nothing that says the UIGEA act will not be used against online poker now or in the future. I would like to be optimistic, but I dont know that this is going to mean a lot. It sounds like the Department of Justice is simply not going to use the Wire Act( which is a very antiquated law) to make its case against online poker.

Because of...

The UIGEA has no backbone without the Wire Act. The UIGEA doesn't take a stand on anything that isn't covered in the Wire Act. Now that the Wire Act doesn't pertain to online poker, they'll need to come up with new legislation to cover prohibiting online poker.

^^^ this.

The UIGEA does not itself determine what forms of gambling are legal/illegal. It merely states that US financial institutions cannot broker transactions for gambling operations that have been deemed illegal by other federal legislation. Up to this point, the Wire Act was the federal legislation used to deem online poker illegal. Now that the Act is finally determined to not apply to online poker, it completely neuters UIGEA as enforceable against online poker, unless they can come up with another sham of legislation to take its place.

That doesn't mean things will change quickly, because the government and legal system rarely act immediately on a rulling, but it does remove an obstacle and open the door a bit wider to positive legislation in the future.

All in all, it's a great Christmas gift for the online poker industry and players, even if it doesn't immediately undo all the damage the DOJ has done up to this point.

And I'm not a huge Obama fan but I'm glad to see the administration weighing in before elections. I hope enough momentum is made to cement some action that can't be undone in the event November brings a new "moral outlook" to the White House.

 

[nevadanick]

From the reports I've seen/read so far, the concensus seems to be that gaming/gambling sites will be allowed 'WITHIN THE U.S.'.
It does not say that internet gambling/poker sites that are based outside the U.S. borders will be allowed to operate within the U.S. All they seem to be doing is opening another avenue for tax revenues for the states where sites or players are 'based'.

Don't believe this will open any free-for-all for internationally based sites. Wait till the Indian casinos see how much their revenues drop, just like Vegas and AC have felt the bite from riverboat and Indian casino gambling. Lawsuit City.....

We will also be on the sidelines watching the battles between 50 state legislatures over who gets how much in new tax revenues. I'm sure they already have it all spent before it even starts to flow.

If poker forums were rife with complaints about rake amounts before ... watch this ... Sites need revenue, plus more to pay THEIR U.S. taxes, plus the states want THEIR share for revenues.

****************************

 

[tcummo]

dont know if this has already been posted.......

http://pokerfuse.com/news/poker-room-news/full-tilt-owners-ratify-gbt-deal/

 

[JamesDaBear]

From the reports I've seen/read so far, the concensus seems to be that gaming/gambling sites will be allowed 'WITHIN THE U.S.'.
It does not say that internet gambling/poker sites that are based outside the U.S. borders will be allowed to operate within the U.S. All they seem to be doing is opening another avenue for tax revenues for the states where sites or players are 'based'.

Don't believe this will open any free-for-all for internationally based sites. Wait till the Indian casinos see how much their revenues drop, just like Vegas and AC have felt the bite from riverboat and Indian casino gambling. Lawsuit City.....

We will also be on the sidelines watching the battles between 50 state legislatures over who gets how much in new tax revenues. I'm sure they already have it all spent before it even starts to flow.

If poker forums were rife with complaints about rake amounts before ... watch this ... Sites need revenue, plus more to pay THEIR U.S. taxes, plus the states want THEIR share for revenues.

****************************

This does mean there's nothing stopping international sites such as 888.com from introducing their poker intrastate or between states that sign interstate deals... then next it will be with canada... maybe latin america... then, who knows? I want to play against the world, but I know there are plenty of action just from US players (even if I won't be able to fire up a late night/early morning session as easily).

As far as Indian Casinos go... in my idiot locale of Washington State, our games have dried up significantly with many casinos forced to close after UIGEA was passed and the state "criminalized" online poker, incentivized by the significant campaign contributions from Indian Casino lobbyists. You can see this as coincidence if you like, since a major downturn in the economy followed/continued afterward.

If Indian Casinos (and Vegas, LA and AC) want us to pay their high rake and tournament fees, then we need somewhere to get our feet wet, so to speak. Since we can't expect them to profitably offer microstakes at a reasonable rake, they need online poker. Online poker creates better funded, better skilled poker players. How could that be bad for a casino anywhere?

 

[deucem]

Welcome back US online poker players

I am not sure if this has been reported on cardschat before this post.

If not why not?

But the possible legalisation of online poker in the United States is being reported here:
http://mashable.com/2011/12/27/justice-department-ruling-online-gambling/
Welcome back USA players.

 

[dmorris68]

I am not sure if this has been reported on cardschat before this post.

If not why not?

It's been posted a number of times, including in this very thread which is what the last several posts have been discussing. Seems odd that you'd question "why not?" without even looking...

 

[Debi]

I am not sure if this has been reported on cardschat before this post.

If not why not?

But the possible legalisation of online poker in the United States is being reported here:
http://mashable.com/2011/12/27/justice-department-ruling-online-gambling/
Welcome back USA players.

It's been posted a number of times, including in this very thread which is what the last several posts have been discussing. Seems odd that you'd question "why not?" without even looking...

I merged his separate thread with this one which he must have missed.

 

[calicard]

Pokerstars location

Doesn't pokerstars have an office in San Jose Ca?

 

[Lofwyr]

Mighty fine of them to come to this conclusion right after they ran off the foreign competition that had a head start and hurt a lot of innocent people in the process.

Don't get me wrong this is really good news but what hypocrites they are.

This times 1 million. Welcome to the USA: a government of the people, by the people and purely for corporate profits... ::facepalm::

 

[kyndlyon]

is true that regardless of how the legal issues are decided for poker in USA, that poker stars will never be open to usa players?

 

[queenmap]

I think this is a step in the right direction and hopegful that gambling does become legal here.

 

[SpadeSFuLL]

Definitely a step in the right direction. Still sucks that were waiting to get back something that shouldn't have been taken away in the first place.

 

[Charade You Are]

I hate to look a gift horse in the mouth, but anyone know WHY the about face-does the DOJ figure it has extorted the maximum value from it's previous stance? Is it just that they have destroyed the competition for US casinos?

Does this mean that Microsoft, Google and Yahoo will get their $31.5 million back from the settlement in 2005 over the charge that they "promoted illegal gambling" by hosting ads?

...or is it worse? By making the news, do they think anti-gaming forces will step up their lobbying to make all online gaming illegal?

I just don't trust these b*****ds.

 

[PaulThePokerCat]

Seems some of you guys are not fond of the DOJ. I personally am glad they shined the light on some of the back-room antics of the sites.