Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Arrests Online Gambling Company Chairman
imaginaryelf writes "Reuters reports that U.S. authorities have arrested Peter Dicks, the chairman of U.K. based online sports betting company Sportingbet Plc, while he was passing through Dallas. Just two months ago, the CEO of another U.K. based online sports betting company, BetOnSports, was arrested on U.S. soil as well. They are both charged with violating the 1961 Federal Wire Act, which can be broadly interpreted as declaring all forms of online gambling illegal in the U.S. Is online gambling the Alcohol Prohibition of the 21st century?"
Pretty sums up how I feel about the gambling industry.
Now my $1000 bet that Peter Dicks would be arrested doesn't look quite so foolish...call my bookie!
I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
> Is online gambling the Alcohol Prohibition of the 21st century? Online gambling is hardly the alcohol prohibition of the 21st century - organised gambling isn't nearly as widespread and deeply rooted in Western culture as consuming alcohol is.
Basilisk Digital
according the article, he was arrested @ kennedy, not in dallas.
If you live outside of the US and have done something that the US have made illegal then don't go there.
I would say cigarette smoking is much closer to alcohol prohibition. I just hope that once they ban smoking in bars I can open up a speakeasy where we'll drink and smoke and gamble online to our heart's content....
Lord only knows what his middle name is...
Online gambling might be illegal in u.s. This guy is an u.k. citizen, and set up a site IN u.k.
Are americans SO moron that they can conclude they have the right to arrest someone according to their own laws, WHEREAS ALL they NEED to do and HAD to do is to bar all access from u.s. to that u.k. site ? Huh ?
Read radical news here
First one gets arrested, that's unfortunate for him.
Second one gets arrested - man, how dumb to you have to be to fly through the US when you know you're likely to get arrested? It's not like international flight lists are ignored these days. Passengers that may pass on domestic flights aren't going to escape scrutiny on international (especially incoming) flights.
Mooniacs for iOS and Android
Its another great example of the US deciding that its perfectly okay to have their laws apply to people from other countries, but the idea of an international criminal court that might try CIA and US Soldiers for torture and crimes against humanity then the answer is no.
Remind me again why people think the US is imperialist?
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
that Steve Jobs has to stay away from Scandinavia or he will be arrested because his company does not comply to the countries IP-laws?
I wonder what odds you could get on that on the gamblingsites
>Is online gambling the Alcohol Prohibition of the 21st century?"
How about drug prohibition or pornography prohibition? Anytime the governement gets in the way of people and what they want to do, someone will find a way around it.
So it's okay for the United States to arrest foreign nationals because they run a business in their own country that is (sort of) illegal in the States.
And yet the American government complains loudly when Freedom Fighters in the Middle East capture and detain members of the American invasion force who are obviously breaking the law by invading those countries?
It would be really nifty if the American government spent as much time trying to provide health-care to its citizens, teaching science in its schools, and waging peace, as it spends on enforcing fear driven puritanical laws at home and waging unjust ideological wars abroad.
--brian
In the near future, the United States of America may be a country that non-Americans fear to travel to. With the DMCA, the Patriot Act, association with gambling sites, corporate deals with Iran, corporate deals with Cuba ... you just simply do not know whether or not you will be arrested when entering the United States. If your non-American company did business with Cuba, could you be arrested? If you engaged in fair use of media in your country, could you be arrested for DMCA violations?
You won't know until you are on American soil.
Smoking bans are the new prohibition.
Second is alcohol prohibition -- lowering the drunk driving standards until you're gulty of drunk driving even though you're not even impaired.
Online gambling is 3rd.
Richard Knob, John Thomas, and Wang Dong were all released from custody today after a mixup leading to their arrest. A police spokesperson was quoted as saying that it was "...a simple clerical error."
Insisting on "correct" English is like saying that there is only one, definitive recipe for chili.
British people. British companies. Americans charging them with crimes as soon as they set foot on US soil.
What a load of bullshit.
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
Take a look at your so-called friend, Britain!
It's a simple matter of complex programming.
the US has no right to arrest foreign citizens following the laws of their respective country. none of this could possibly stand up in court.
Of course, were the USA we can do what ever we want... I often wonder how we'd react if say Bill Gates was arrested in Communist China for being an "obscenely rich capitalist"..
This is either harrassment or just the US thinking it has rights to push the rest of the world around.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Duh! That's why he doesn't travel to China
SERIOUSLY UGGH THIS CRAP IS SO ANNOYING IF ITS NOT ONLINE GAMBLING ITS GOING TO BE MOONSHINE OR SOME OTHER PATHETIC VENTURE.
IDIOTS AND MONEY ALWAYS PART WAYS. ALWAYS. BAN THE STOCK MARKET IF YOU DONT LIKE GAMBLING. JESUS.
KARMA HIT AHOY.
Seriously. Who the hell cares. I don't care. Do you care? No? Me neither.
Seriously. Who the hell cares. I don't care. Do you care? No? Me neither.
Seriously. Who the hell cares. I don't care. Do you care? No? Me neither.
Seriously. Who the hell cares. I don't care. Do you care? No? Me neither.
Seriously. Who the hell cares. I don't care. Do you care? No? Me neither.
...is the Alcohol Prohibition of the 21st. Century! Next obvious question?
There are a few things I don't understand about the States and this is one of them, all the talk about freedom and democracy and you can't even place a bet with your own money on the internet. Somehow this just doesn't seem free to me...
:)
Don't panic, the liberators are on the way
With a name like that, I would have expected him to be in the p0rn industry instead.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
No. Marijuana is the Alcohol Prohibition of the 21st century.
Started up a website serving up good old kiddy porn, started charging US users to download those images I should be safe then.
I think another person suggested that the US should have censured illegal sites.
How about if you're going to conduct business in a country, you follow and obey all local rules and regulations? If you can't comply, then about making it so that you block access yourself so you don't violate those laws and regulations.
Second, I can't believe this Dicks decided to go through the US even though the other guy went in a couple months earlier and got arrested. It's either arrogence or stupidity.
First off, the link says, "Dicks was arrested in New York late on Wednesday at JFK Airport on a warrant from Louisiana" nothing about Dallas. What's up with the warrant from Louisiana? Sounds like some small-timer that wants to stir things up. There's got to be more to the story.
I'm a big-time outspoken conservative and I love to play no-limit hold 'em (and hi/lo omaha). I'd like to state that I am very diappointed that republicans are backing this and I believe this really is just for votes this fall. There are democrat supporters on this as well, so it isn't completely one-sided. Everyone interested in keeping internet gambling alive needs to talk to their representative.
The good news is that this was tried in the late 90's and failed. It passed the house in 2003 but the senate didn't take up the issue. With the rate at which poker in particular is gaining popularity, this should be an issue that can be defeated. I see the senate again not taking up this issue in 2006. Post 2006 elections, it should disappear for a while again. Apparently big money doesn't buy all the votes as online gambling is worth bilions of dollars. AFIAK, as long as we have state lottos and Indian casinos, I don't want to hear anything from the state about why online gambling should be illegal.
Now as for the gentlemen who have been arested... the only good thing is that maybe they can sue and further clarify the law. The fifth circuit says the law only applies to sports. It would be great to see additional courts back this up as I believe they would.
Marijuana Prohibition is the Alcohol Prohibition of the 21st Century.
========
77 77 77 2e 6d 65 6c 76 69 6e 73 2e 63 6f 6d
I despise the government of this country on so many levels, I'm not even going to begin enumerating them. We waste more time and money doing stupid shit that serves no more practical purpose than to piss everyone off than I care to think about. This is just par for the fucking course.
And people wonder why the RIAA/MPAA think it's a sensible business model to strongarm everyone and their mother to force everything through established channels which they maintain a stranglehold on...look what they're using for their example. Disgusting.
Isn't that what the NYTimes did when they didn't allow ready access to a story in the UK, trying to support a UK law?
It's a lot to ask of any site, though, and I don't believe it was the wisest decision on the part of the NYT.
It seems that arresting and holding these men is being done on very sketchy premises. It's probably illegal, since no precedent has been set in court that makes these men guilty of a crime. Why don't they go after the people who are placing the bets? You can't just arrest a person and then go about creating a law to make him guilty. In comparison, the RIAA goes after people sharing files illegally in the US. Then again, I don't see anyone who runs Pirate Bay in the news travelling across the United States. Maybe the folks running the online betting sites should take a hint.
In the near future, the United States of America may be a country that non-Americans fear to travel to. With the DMCA, the Patriot Act, association with gambling sites, corporate deals with Iran, corporate deals with Cuba ... you just simply do not know whether or not you will be arrested when entering the United States. If your non-American company did business with Cuba, could you be arrested? If you engaged in fair use of media in your country, could you be arrested for DMCA violations?
You won't know until you are on American soil.
I'm Canadian. Some of my friends still live in the US. But I'm never crossing that border again; I swore it long ago, when Dmitry Skylrov was arrested on DMCA charges, and when Alan Cox pointed out that he could be arrested for working on Linux.
Since the passing of the PATRIOT act, I'm all the more glad of my vow. And the more I study US law, the more glad I am. The laws in the US are striking puritanical; and while they have free speech rights on paper, they often don't mean much in practice. Television broadcasts, for example, don't count as free speech: but political campaign contributions do. Gambling is illegal. Not conforming to the local dress code can be illegal! I'm no constitutional legal scholar, but I can tell that a TV show is closer to "speech" than a wad of money is. The KKK has it's right to hate speech; but people who protest war get walled off in "free speech zones". A reputable scientist is terrorized into halting brain research because he's afraid of the religious wingnuts firebombing his house. Gun toting maniacs wander the streets, and the police are powerless to stop them. No thanks!
Besides, I've found out that I'm accidentally a criminal in the US; I actually had sex in a state where sex is illegal. That's right: "fornication" is (or was) still illegal in Oklahoma, unless you happen to be married to the woman at the time. Admittedly, the statute isn't enforced much anymore: when I left, it was mostly being used to persecute homosexuals, who weren't granted the right to marry, and now were being threatened with jail time for being actively gay.
I wouldn't set foot on that country's soil if you paid me. There's too much corruption, too little freedom and too little safety.
Smoking bans are, as far as I've ever seen, meant to limit the health effects of secondhand smoke. This is not prohibition.
Drunk driving bans are meant to limit the number of auto accidents. You may or may not be right about where the limit is set, but it isn't prohibition either.
Gambling, on the other hand, has no "collateral damage" aspect to it. Or rather, it has no downside that causes people unrelated to the user to suffer.
Prohibition was justified as a way to prevent people from being self destructive. Online gambling laws are justified along similar lines. In both cases, and in the case of illegal drugs, the law is an attempt to regulate a person's private life "for their own best interests". Censorship and sex laws have sometimes had similar justifications put forward.
You can oppose all those forms of prohibition by putting forward the idea that a person's best interests are their own business, not the governments. By that logic, an adult is entitled to the freedom to live as they choose, whether you agree with their way of life or not. If that makes them screw up the lives of others (like an addict mugging someone, or a parent not feeding their kid), then punish the offender for the law they broke - robbery or child neglect.
Smoking bylaws and drunk driving laws are a seperate case. In those cases, the lives of bystandards are affected by the actions of one individual - either through accidents caused by impairment, or by health risks associated with secondhand smoke. Thus, they are fundamentally different from prohibition - they're examples of the idea that "my right to swing my fist ends where your face begins".
Equating these types of law with prohibition is illogical.
Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
Well, no, marijuana prohibition is the alcohol prohibition of the modern age. With the sole details that the drug is significantly less harmful than alcohol, and the effects of the prohibition are significantly more widespread and harmful, it's essentially identical. We're just so used to it that we don't even notice any more.
Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.
all is forgiven.
% 2C_ElcomSoft%2C_Adobe%2C_and_the_DMCA
Didn't the US try this before and get told where to shove it ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_case_of_Sklyarov
As a contrast, American slashdotters might like to know that Philip Anschutz, (an American) has plans to set up a casino in London.0 ,,1856204,00.html
He even spoke to the deputy prime minister about it. http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/
Maher Arar: Statement to the Media November 4, 2003
One sentence summary: Maher Arer was a software engineer for the MathWorks in Canada, was vacationing in Tunis, was called back by The Mathworks on an emergency, scheduled a flight back with a transfer at Kennedy airport in NYC, and the U.S. deported him to Syria for torture.
Maybe it's time for the USA to ask China about making a nice big American firewall to prevent online gambling? Maybe call it Homeland Security? It's ironic that most Americans don't understand irony.
Remember Dmitry Sklyarov?
Perhaps this is all a fiendish plot to cut down on US tourism...
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
> L
You are sitting in an airplane seat, in the coach section of an airliner. The airliner is descending.
> I
You are carrying:
>READ TICKET
I don't see any ticket here.
>READ TICKET STUB
The ticket stub is for an intercontinental flight from Great Britain to Mexico, with a stopover in Dallas.
>DALLAS?
I don't know how to dallas.
>DOES THIS PLANE HAVE A STOPOVER IN DALLAS?
I don't see any plane here.
>LEAVE PLANE
Your seatbelt holds you in the seat, preventing you from standing up.
>OPEN SEATBELT
You cannot open that.
>UNFASTEN SEATBELT
Unfastened.
>LEAVE PLANE
You need to stand up first.
>STAND UP
You are now standing. The passenger sitting next to you looks agitated.
>LEAVE PLANE
The exit doors are locked, as the plane is still in flight.
>FUCK
I don't know how to fuck.
The plane is about to land in Dallas. You are likely to be arrested by a grue.
>ARE THEY GOING TO ARREST ME?
I don't see any they here.
>EXIT
You cannot exit now.
Your sword is glowing faintly.
>QUIT
You cannot quit now.
Your sword is glowing faintly.
FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
The only crime the offshore gaming companies committed is competing against US based brick and mortar casinos. If you travel out of a state that doesn't have gambling to a state that does, isn't the casino enabling an act that couldn't occur in the gambler's home state? The gaming corporations don't want more competition (they spent alot of money in California to restrict Indian Casinos) and the federal and state government don't want to lose revenue from offshore gambling.
I might be ignorant but it seems the whole point is to ban internet gambling because its proceeds can't easily be taxed by the USG - some of it is probably a moral issue (and since the Republicans may be doing less well with lots of people, their conservative Christian core is more important to them now that before), but a lot of it would seem to be an issue of money that the USG can't tax (Democrats might oppose this as well, for different public reasons). With internet sales, the (widely ignored) "use tax" for states can be applied, but I don't know of anything similar with gambling (or other less traceable income).
I think Dicks is probably here for awhile though - at least for the US, US citizens are under the laws of the countries they visit rather than those of their home countries (though didn't Germany try to go after citizens engaging in sex tourism abroad (Thailand)?), and I would think that other countries might behave similarly. It doesn't look good for the US, but I don't think it's necessarily illegal.
I'm sure organized criminals appreciate the business opportunities provided them by the USG, and I'm pretty sure that they will take full advantage of them.
The previous arrest had included charges of racketeering. It's quite possible this one does as well.
As to the Wire Act, and the enforceability of such: This is really no different than betting over the phone or by mail. This is just a newer version of an old debate - when an activity takes place over a distance, and it is illegal in one location and not the other, can it be enforced on the person in the latter? Obviously, the government of Louisiana feels it can, provided that person comes within their territory, or can be extradited. Other governments have behaved similarly, for other laws, although most just prefer censorship.
The issue is not whether gambling should be illegal. Sure, it's a stupid law, and it would be a simple answer for this one situation if gambling was legal, but it wouldn't answer the larger question. On the one hand, no government at any level wants its laws to be so easily avoided, and it's ineffective to go after the individuals who use the service rather than the providers (just ask the RIAA - well, in a few years anyway). On the other hand, there is certainly a case to be made that those who offer services should not expect to be held in violation of a law that didn't exist in the locality from which they offered said services.
So I guess what I'm saying is, "I dunno." Is it fair to say, "If you do something that breaks the law here, and that has an effect here, you can never come here"? Or is it fair to say, "You can't touch us, you can only block access to our site from everyone in your country"? (This has in fact been suggested by other posts here! Is this something you want to encourage?) I for one am going to consider it some more rather than locking myself into some knee-jerk reaction.
P.S. One last thought - it's possible the warrant was issued due to activities during a previous trip to the US. That would change the whole situation.
Oooh! Oooh! Can we now criminally charge corporations for moving offshore to skirt US labor laws??? Please? Pretty Please???
They've got TV shows about poker and blackjack now you can watch any time of day. Great drama surrounds it, with slick presentation. Television is making it ok, trendy, and accepted. Celebreties gamble for charity. Celebreties go to new, ultra hip nightclubs in Vegas and are photographed by paparazi and distributed across grocery stores check out stands for middle america to consume and fantasize about. All this nice dressing is put on gambling, but partcicularly card games, which are more appealing I suppose than watching an addicted Marge Simpson, complete with smoke filled beehive and wild eyes, hitting the one arm bandit. Plus, there's the illusion of skill rather than randomness, which is delluding.
rant! And how come Pete Rose can never be in the Hall of Fame, because of his gambling problem (which now should be ok, since gambling has seemed to have lost its stigma they should do a review of that), but baseball players who use steriods can be in the Hall of Fame?
The reason this guy got arrested probably is because if you win a big amount of money gambling (in the US I think the amount is $1500), you're supposed to pay taxes on it. I think by allowing US citizens gamble on his UK website, perhaps they are avoiding paying taxes on their winnings. It certainly isn't for moral reasons because we don't seem to have much in the way of that... well, unless it involves sex, and then you become "sinful." (but shooting guns, gambling, and playing sports and cheating are ok)
Lane Myer: I have great fear of tools. I once made a birdhouse in woodshop and the fair housing committee condemned it.
Is the Prohibition of the 21st Century.
I wish we could choose which country we pay taxes to. Wait, we can! I think its time to leave the US for a country run LESS by the church, how about Vatican City?
I hope more people hear you.
Prohibition was advocated on the basis of the damage alcoholics do to their families and those around them, though such damage could have been limited by other means. When a highly restrictive method is chosen for a problem of limited scale, one can safely assume that the initial problem is a pretense for a method decided on for other reasons.
If secondhand smoking risks (to workers, as has been claimed here in OH) are the cause for smoking bans, why not mandate internal air quality rules, or separate rooms for smokers and nonsmokers (though the latter wouldn't help all workers)? Banning smoking in public places is a rather restrictive way to achieve these ends...unless their real goal is something else. There is even an employer here (Scotts, my least-favorite lawn care company) who has a no-smoking-anywhere (not at work, but anywhere) policy for its employees, with smoking being a firable offense. Again, if reducing health care costs to nonsmokers is the point, why not charge smokers extra? Well....
No, Prohibition is probably about right for this. They've already helped to assure smoking as an expression of "freedom" for many, likely to make smoking harder to actually eradicate. History may not repeat itself, but it rhymes quite nicely.
but he's doing a lot of business in US.
He's doing business on the internet, which is globally available to all. Nailing him for violating US laws would be like having a US porn-site owner being arrested in a country where porn is illegal.
Is online gambling the Alcohol Prohibition of the 21st century?
No, I think that would still have to be Marijuana Prohibition. But the gambling prohibition is stupid too. I've been living in Las Vegas for two years now and I can say that it's no worse than any of the cities with more restrictive laws. It's more gaudy, but I doubt that's the primary intent of all this puritanical prohibition crap.
Cheers.
Uh, no. The fucking "War on Drugs" is the Prohibition of the 21st century, hands down.
If the charges had any merit, why did the American authorities not have the English police arrest him and get him extradited to the US? Or were they worried that they would be laughed out of an English court?
On http://www.tradesports.com/v2/ the current odds that the "New internet gaming law" is passed and signed is at 18%.
"Fix it"
I can rest easy that this criminal is behind bars!
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to buy some deep in-the-money Apple October call options. I think I'm gonna win big this time!
Is online gambling the Alcohol Prohibition of the 21st century? :P
Nope thats the war on drugs. Its not working out to well this time either but we may get the new kennedy family out it
We went to war with the U.K. over their habit of seizing Americans (whom they still considered to be English citizens, not having formally recognized the United States of America) who were on British soil at the time and pressing them into service in their navy. Now we're behaving in basically the same way.
I recently started receiving ads through regular mail about online sports betting, thick "betting guides," and the like.
I don't gamble. I wouldn't even know what the terms of a bet meant, or how to make one. I certainly don't have any money. I live in Dallas, where these arrests have been taking place. So far, they're just targeting site owners, but you can bet* they'll go after people who use the sites, eventually.
Am I being set up?
You laugh, but seriously, I wonder.
* not a real bet.
Suppose I make a new site ecrack.com we sell you crack cocaine online. Now I happen to operate out of the new People's Most Happy Shiny and Democratic Republic of Grjkizstan. Because I'm friend's with the local dictator, it's perfectly legal by Grjkizstany law for me to manufacture and sell crack, among other things. So I do, and I do so on the web. However, I don't just sell it in Grjkizstan, I target the US. I have US 800 numbers you can call, staffed during US business hours. I take US credit cards and ship to US locations.
Are you saying that they shouldn't be able to arrest me for drug trafficing if I am foolish enough to come over there? Just because my growing operation, HQ and servers are in Grjkizstan, doesn't mean that I'm not breaking US law by selling to US citizens and what's more, targeting them.
If the guy in question happened to have some people form the US playing that had lied about their address, ok fine I'd understand. However he was targeting US citizens on purpose. Well, that's against US law. I'm not saying it's a good law, but it's the law. Thus, when he came to the US, it shouldn't be that surprising that he got arrested.
can't be prosecuted.
Why are we arresting these men under a Wire act that was written in 1961. The simple answer? We can't prosecute them under any other law. Gambling is illegal but because they arn't in america they arn't liable.
The sad thing is that Americans want gambling, obviously. But they are accusing a EUROPEAN company, of breaking an American statute dealing with american "wires".
Btw check the wikipedia article closely. "The U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Wire Act applies only to sports betting and not other types of online gambling. The Supreme Court has not officially ruled on the meaning of the Federal Wire Act as it pertains to online gambling." The real question is was the betting on american sports?
The sad fact is as an American I feel bad in this case. Every time we take an obscure law and hold someone under it, something that someone goes "oh we can nail them for that" and others go "that's clever", I die a little inside. The founding fathers didn't say "let's be clever" They said "let's make a country and laws". They didn't look for some loophole with the british, they busted some barrels of tea, got liquored up and won a war (not all in that order or the same night... I hope).
If America really believes something like this is wrong make a law. If America really believes something like this is acceptable revoke the law. America is a very easy place but we make everything complex like this shit.
After all, they are a US based operation (that's where their HQ is). Should they be allowed to say "fuck you" to the EU's rulings? No, of course not. They have to care because they choose to sell their products there. Likewise, eBay must restrict the sale of Nazi propaganda in France, but not in the US. Why? It's the law in France. They can't cop out and say "Well we aren't a French company so we don't have to obey French law." Well yes you do if you want to do business with French citizens.
how long until a law is deemed 'archaic'?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
...I flat out refuse to fly. I'll drive or take a damn sailboat before I'll give an airline one penny or give those goons the satisfaction of seeing another sheep bend over to get sheared and get the shaft put to them. I cannot understand why any MAN would put up with seeing their wife or daughter get felt up by some armed goon pervo at the airport. I will NOT put up with that be a sheep nonsense at the airport. I am a FREE MAN, not some peasant who must bow and scrape in front of the king's mercenary henchmen. FUCK EM!
So good for you foreign guys, and every time you avoid flying into or out of the US, drop a note to the airline you avoided and to some select senators here, and maybe a few letters to the editor at the big papers, let them know that this bullshit is stupid!
The entire REASON for the formation of the USA was because we wanted to trade FREEDOM for the ILLUSION of "security" that was given by being a "king's subject". Screw that noise.
I agree 100%. One heard that marijuana would be legalized when the "hippies" from the sixties got in power, and they have essentially made things worse. There is too much money and power for the government in keeping it illegal. Best one can hope for is a semi-decriminalization like we see in California, which, while keeping you out of jail, still allows them to seize all your stuff.
Money would be the scarce resource in this case - there is plenty of health care, but it costs. If health care is scarce on a societal basis, then ban smoking for all, but state/federal govts don't want to forgo the money it makes them, and they remember the last two times they tried banning something that a large fraction of the population used, and how well it worked/is working.
If they were interested in the scarcity of health care, they would fire people who are overweight or who eat badly, but that would require an even more substantial intrusion into their workers' lives, and probably leave them short of workers.
I will sleep safe now, knowing this monster is off the street.
Why are there even laws prohiting gambling (online or offline) anywhere? As long as the parties involved fairly honor their bets and pay the man his share then there is nothing wrong. The winner wins, the government wins, and the loser loses.
I get scared nowadays every time I have to go to the USA. Border guards can ask questions that are illegal anywhere else... "Have you ever been arrested?" Not conviceted, just arrested - then they want to know the details.
I hate having to explain that yes, 30 years ago, I was once with some friends who did something stupid, but no, in the end I was not convicted of any crime. (Yes, for the flames - I know it was stupid!) However, the border guards can arbitrarily deny you entry if they think you have been involved in activities involving "moral turpitude", whether convicted or not. "Moral turpitude" can be anything beyond traffic tickets, if they want.
I went in and out of the USA 2 or 3 times a year with no hassles - until after Sept. 11th. Then, the first time they asked, I had to sit there for 2 hours while they looked it up on the computer and dug through their records. I guess they didn't like the "not guilty" bit, it didn't fit their mold of what the choices were... Always at the drive-thru borders, never had a hassle at airports, even coming back from Europe.
And you know that, with their computers hooked into the Canadian system, they are just waiting for you to say "No, never been arrested" so they can find a reason to deny entry - lying to the border guards. Maybe they have a quota to fill.
Other countries are so much more sensible. I think I was reading New Zealand's rules once, and it said something like "no jail time in the last 10 years"...
Then there's the complaints from Canadian truckers - apparently, the paperwork for a transport truck has to arrive a minimum of 90 minutes ahead of the vehicle, or else they arrest you, fine you $5000, and turn you and your vehicle back. Free trade? hah!
What's an international company supposed to do to keep americans from using their freedom? They ask if you're from the US. They tell you to check and see if it's legal to do what you're doing there. Are they supposed to visit you?
The guy at my deli never asks for ID when I buy lottery tickets and all the bingo I played as a kid at church was when I was under 18... but you let one american bet the Packer's to win the SuperBowl and bam! You're in jail.
We have a goverment that outlaws things so they can profit from doing it themselves. When the Mega-Millions jackpot is $25 million, you know how much money they make? Let's just say the goverment is taking more than half before showing you that number.
Because many US states license gambling in some form or another, some assume this is just a pissing match over something the US hasn't figured out how to tax, yet. However, there are many folks in the US who aren't at all happy with the spread of gaming here no matter what the tax revenue is, and quite a few of them sit in the US Congress.
Ever tried looking up anti-semitic sites on Yahoo from France? Tried bidding on swastika-embellished merchandise on eBay from Germany? Think the problem is just because someone isn't collecting VAT?
What it comes down to is that some folks don't want to let the next Hitler find his voice, and other folks the next Al Capone to fund his.
Luke, help me take this mask off
A case like this is currently before the WTO and if the US loses it will either have to ban all inter-state betting in the US (which would effectively kill the horse-racing industry) or countries like Antigua will be able to put tarriffs on US imports. The issue is that from a WTO perspective you can ban anything you want for import provided that domestic production is also banned. As the US allows betting (lotteries and even gambling websites such as YouBet.com -- which proudly describes itself as "US-based and licensed, NASDAQ-listed"), the Antiguans are arguing that the US's position is untenable. So far, the WTO seems to agree with them.
But there's more! Since, the US is preventing more online gambling than Antigua can possibly raise in tarriffs, they are asking the WTO permission to be able to pirate Hollywood films and raise the money by selling them. Needless to say, everyone in Hollywood thinks this is a superb idea and welcomes it with open arms.
The remarkable thing is the amount of headway that Antigua has made so far against all odds (as this Washington Post article punningly puts it)
Conquest's 3rd Law: Every organisation behaves as if it is run by secret agents of its opponents.
This is not different then some US citizen coming to a different county to endulge in activities that are illegal in the US. Is the US now going to police weed smoking in Netherlands and arrest the caffe owners?
IF his server was not on US soil and the US citizen came to his siter, those US citizen are quilty of breaking US laws not him since it wastn done on US soil.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
So what happens in Vegas doesn't stay in Vegas anymore, time to adapt to the future instead of trying to legilate to the past.
Sorry, But seriously, Who the fuck do the american government think they are?
God Be Gone
There seems to be a fair bit of confusion as to how the United States would have jurisdiction in this matter. Without getting too much into specifics, I'll quickly address this.
... To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations." International commerce with the US necessarily would involve some activities that occur outside of the US. But since the people engaging in those activities are engaged in commerce with us, they fall under the scope of what Congress can regulate. It's not necessary for them to physically be in the US at the time, for if it were, that wouldn't be international commerce; it would be wholly domestic.
The Constitution provides Congress with "Power
In this case, the person apparently set up a server in the UK and used it to conduct business with people in the US. Furthermore, in doing so, he apparently violated US laws which prohibit people from engaging in this form of commerce where it involves the US, regardless of where the person happens to be while doing it.
The same sort of thing occurs regularly within the US. For example, if a person in Maine has a website which is part of a business, buying or selling something (as opposed to being merely informational), then they are engaging in interstate commerce nationwide. An Alaskan user who buys something from their site has engaged in commerce with them, and now the person in Maine is subject to Alaskan law. This is the price of doing business with people across borders in our legal system: the differing laws on both sides of the border apply, because the transaction as a whole is occuring in both, not just in one or the other.
The actual situation is a bit more complex than this, but this is the gist of it.
If the person who was arrested doesn't wish to get in more trouble in the future, then he's going to either need to comply with US law, or stop doing business that crosses the US border. Or he can try to avoid going to the US or having assets in the US so that he simply stays outside of our reach, despite violating our laws. (N.b. that airspace counts: there are plenty of instances of people flying on planes, and getting served while crossing the airspace of a particular jurisdiction, by someone that followed them on the plane and waited for the right moment. Landing in that jurisdiction isn't required.)
In any case, this isn't much of an example of our stretching ourselves. If you want to see that, I'd suggest looking at the Alien Tort Claims Act. Personally, I don't have a problem with that, or with our general approach to this.
To those who would argue that repressive countries such as China or Saudi Arabia could try the same thing for basically innocuous things like pointing out how repressive they are (as opposed to something arguably more serious, such as illegally running gambling operations), let's remember that they are repressive countries and thus no one should ever want to go there until they clean up their act. As many idiotic and downright evil things as the US has been doing lately (or historically), we're not quite that bad, and I hope we're soon to get significantly better.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
I'm sick and tired of the gov- ah, what's the point? :(
organized crime in bed with the government and is taking out threats to it's "real world" or the gambeling sights they run.
I get a kick when people post that the government can't prosecute people for gambling with the wire act. When in fact the wire act has been used to take down bookies for close to 40 years and was passed primarily to stop organized crime conducting activities like book making via telephone. The fact is that gambling is illegal in many places and using a telephone or computer to gamble is equally illegal in a LOT of places. Facilitation of gambling via the internet is going to be just as illegal and a company that is almost exclusively targeting US citizens for gambling and then the CEO flying to the US trying to influence US politics as a foreigner (which is also illegal in certain jurisidictions) isn't worried that he's going to be arrested for violating US laws?
I'd also like to point out that all you foreigners that are SHOCKED that the US is enforcing US laws wouldn't be shocked if someone selling NAZI material on the internet would be arrested in Germany (which has happened), or a US citizen selling and shipping handguns to Europe would also be arrested. Do you honestly think the guy running the pedophillia website targeting specifically French citizens isn't going to be arrested when he travels there? You're a fool and an idiot if you don't think people conducting illegal transactions in foreign countries get arrested all the time when they travel to said country. I bet I could find an example of someone that was arrested on travel to a foreign country for every nation on earth and for every action imaginable. There is nothing special about what the US doing so nor is there going to be any nation on earth that hasn't done something very similar, in fact the only thing special about it is that it's fasionable right now to attack the US.
These days you hear of arrests and extraditions...
Isn't there someone somewhere that thinks you have done something wrong.
Can't he write it down.
How can he tolerate that you are not punished?
Isn't there a bad guy that should be extradited somewhere.
Is there anyone without a reason.
Sit back, decide what you want and dislike.
Your opinions need not be limited as such.
Apply, apply, apply, apply....
No-one else can.
I wonder if any of the people who took the offer were from the US?
As far as I can tell, Mr. Dicks has not been charged under the wire act, but under a specific piece of legislation from Louisiana that specifically bans gambling out of state using telecommunications services.
The wire act is federal, and mentions "Phones"... leaving a bit of a grey area when it comes to the Internet.
So far not many details have been released, so it's all speculation at this point.
You see, the Internet is not a truck.
It's a series of medieval projectile weapons.
I don't know which is worse--- Getting arrested for what he was doing, or having his name.
-----
Sig Sauer
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
He's transporting the winnings.The profits from an illegal on immoral business.
Also, when is the CEO of HP being arrested?
I call BS. I've heard from several sources that the murder and general crime rates in the 20s were sky-high--higher than they've ever been since. It was the birth of the modern archtypical mafia, for fuck's sake. Organized crime would've never got such a solid foothold in this country if we didn't give them an illicit substance they could sell that was 1) Easy to make/import and 2) In extremely high demand. The Prohibition drastically reduced the supply, thus the price skyrocketed. It's the EXACT same situation that's happened with the war on drugs--the crackdown only drives up the prices (both by decreasing supply and by increasing the risk/cost of doing business), but the end result is instead of hundreds of thousands of small-time petty suppliers making a couple bucks on the side, you get a few major suppliers who are OBSCENELY rich from their nearly limitless profit margins. They then turn around and use that money to buy weapons, hire hitmen, etc. If you could get crack for $1.50/pound and supply was plentiful, do you think ANYONE would be killing each other over it? Do you think that the junkies would be robbing people in order to get the money to pay for it? Ok, some still would, but most of 'em would simply get a shit part-time job at e.g. McDonalds or hell, beg for money. The destitute addicts would quickly burn out and/or OD and die (a few might hit bottom and decide to turn their lives around) and that's fucking fine by me--keep the drugs cheap so no one has to wave a gun in my face in order to take my money so they can afford their shit.
No - the alcohol prohibition didn't work because it was blatantly obvious that is was an unreasonable law. Everybody (except perhaps puritans) drank alcohol and everybody knew that prohibition was not the way to limit the problems with alcohol abuse. Not so with gambling - yes, a lot of people gamble, at least if you count such things as betting on sports events, but it very far from everybody that get a kick out of it. On top of that, I think many people sympathize with hitting the ones who profit from more or less shady, organized gambling cartels, even if they bet on sports events every week. It's worth bearing in mind that gambling (especially online) has a huge potential for swindling a lot of people out of a lot of money, something that can't be done as easily with alcohol.
The modern day equivalent of the alcohol prohibition is more like the current drug laws. A very large segment of the population use recreational drugs and feel the laws are completely out of touch with reality. It would help a lot on people's respect for the law if it was changed to actually reflect how dangerous the individual drugs are; but that would mean either prohibiting alcohol and tobacco or legalising cannabis, ecstasy and a number of other drugs that are known to be less dangerous than those.
they're a bunch of cheats and crooks. Arrest the lot of them and make them serve lengthy jail sentences.
Gambling is the denial of God. The Ten Commandment clearly says there should be no God for you other than YHWH. Gamblers are adoring the Satan when they put their faith in the dice rather than trust in God. Gambling can be tolerated only and even then just bvarely when it is used to support public good, like state lottery.
7 /Hieronymus_Bosch_-_The_Garden_of_Earthly_Delights _-_Hell.jpg
Look at Jerome van Aken's art and you will understand what awaits avid gamblers in the eternity. Look in the lower left corner:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1
"Is online gambling the Alcohol Prohibition of the 21st century?"
No that would be the "War on Drugs".
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
Except for the part where the WTO has an explicit ruling that a country is allowed to ban foreign nations selling her a product on moral grounds ONLY IF the same rules are observed for domestic businesses. Do you want me to get even more clear? The guy WAS NOT breaking any CURRENT law and the Leach bill about to pass IS unlawful because of the exceptions it provides.
Your assumption is the guy's company was doing something illegal. It wasn't. He won't ba charged under the 1961 wire act, they KNOW it won't stand in court. He'll be charged under the RICO act, which could charge you, me and every single person out there for ANYTHING. Don't believe me? Go read it.
1. The US wants to make money on the fines allowed by the Federal Wire Act. I mean they have a great potential source of income here, and if you can stretch the definition of the law then why not try. (This is their opinion, not mine.) I will note, the people they have gone after are sports betting sites, though they have said they want to expand it. I do not think the courts are going to let that fly.
2. There has probably been a lot of money thrown at the government by casino owners to enforce this law. (They probably also want the broadened interpretation.) Right now, the number of places you can legally gamble in the US are very few and far between. Many places have made it illegal and some won't even allow lotteries. The casinos worry about losing money because people are moving to online poker sites for their gambling needs.
I believe that this is insane. Gambling itself is a rather harmless vice. This law was obviously created for one reason and one reason only. It was an attempt to take out organized crime. The government always had a hard time making charges stick. A lot of sports betting was handled by phone, and this law made it very easy to arrest and charge the people taking bets. I really just wish that the US would look at revising the laws instead of going the opposite direction and broadening the laws and trying to enforce them beyond the intended scope.
"Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb."
I wonder if this guy can cite the recent WTO decision against the US as an argument that the federal government doesn't have any right to block international gambling?
-- Give me ambiguity or give me something else!
If you are sitting in the USA, with the pipe from a hookah reaching across to you from Mexico, where the cannibis is smoldering, are you breaking a US law because you are inhaling air polluted coming out of the pipe?
And is it just the person sitting in the USA that is breaking the law or is it also the person in Mexico (different somebody) who is keeping the hookah full of cannibas?
This assumes, of course, that smoking pot is legal in Mexico.
When is the US going to learn that they are NOT the moral center of the universe?!?!?!?
... you may assume that reading this I am from another country but that is not true. I am American born and bred but I am REALLY getting sick of the Puritans running the show.
This is just another example of their Gestapo tactics at policing morality. The powers-that-be even take it upon themselves to arrest American citizens who do things in other countries that ARE NOT illegal in those countries but ARE illegal in the US.
Now
Well, to me it's the same as the whole handgun issue. When someone is shot, do you take issue with the gun manufacturer who was the "enabler," or do you take issue with the person who was holding the gun?
Just because a gambling company targets US customers doesn't mean that said US customers were magically compelled to start gambling and break the law. True, the site was an enabler, but the moral and ethical responsibility stays with the US citizen who is gambling. US citizens should know US law and therefore not do anything to break it - it's ludicrous to hold a non-US citizen responsible for your own citizenry's lack of self control.
From Sept 8th news at Cyclingnews.com:
"French newspaper L'Equipe reported on Wednesday that the French national lottery Française des Jeux has started legal action against the company Unibet.com. In France, betting and gambling is illegal except for the national lottery, horse races managed by PMU and casinos, and Française des Jeux argues that Unibet.com makes business on French territory even if it is based elsewhere. The Belgian national lottery, Lotto, reportedly also considers a lawsuit."
Unibet is "Licensed and regulated by laws in the UK and in Malta".
RTFM; please, I beg you.
A remarkably similar story to the Canada/US softwood lumber fiasco. No arrests in this case, but exactly the same tactics employed by US trade "negotiators", legistlators and the justice system.
they got a massive beatdown over the years in that one as well, but it's not until the new Canadian government basically gave in and renegotiated a treaty they didn't have to that we'll start to see any of the illegally collected tariffs returned to Canadian companies.
Reason why there is hope for the future generation #364:
"I wish my grass was emo so it could cut itself."
Uh, NO! The Alcohol Prohibition of the 21st century is the Drug War, especially the War On Marijuana. This was the first step in eroding our civil liberties, before it transformed into the War On Terror.
http://www.DRCNet.org.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
I'd say 20 years minimum. Especially if the law is being used in some way like this, or a radically new technology is used. But in reality it's for any law that isn't used according to the dictionary, and for the most part this law isn't.
This law's focused was soly on intercountry communication lines (since we really didn't have any other) such as telegraph and phone. It had no idea what an internet was, it has no idea about online gambling or online sports betting. It is just an old law that someone figured out could be used for this.
This is bullshit.
- dicks-chairman-of-sportingbet.html
I don't know how to effectively express my outrage over this action by the US government.
Check out these links for background info;
www.nytimes.com
money.cnn.com
today.reuters.co.uk
www.businessweek.com
So basically we have a UK citizen, operating a UK business (sportingbetplc.com board) who the moment he steps foot into the USA is arrested, not for crimes he committed but for crimes committted by US citizens.
Oh and arrested under ambiguous Louisiana law, that defines all interstate gaming as illegal.
I cant wait for the chairman of the NY Times to be arrested on a visit to China because chinese citizens were reading copies of the NY Times on the internet.
Oh and as for visiting 'unfriendly' countries, how about if Castro started shooting american tourists he found in Cuba for 'crimes of treason' in carrying US dollars in their wallets?
This is insane America. When are you going to wake up and begin to be a good 'world citizen'?
You cant just arrest people for 'crimes against the state' that dont even occur in your country........isn't that what terrorists do? Impose their will against the world at large.
I keep hoping I will wake up and the insanity will end? it's like a bad dream.
It's getting hard to tell who is the bad guys anymore.
http://deancollinsblog.blogspot.com/2006/09/peter
Dean
Hmmm, I thought that was called "The war on Drugs"?
Marijuana Prohibition has been a reality for over 70 years. It has caused trillions of US$ to go down the shitter, and caused millions of American citizens loss of liberty and freedom. Just so that some racist policeman needed job security. And now the origins of Marijuana Prohibition is lost to history, and if you try to inform someone of the actual reasons for the beginning of Marijuana Prohibition you are branded a racist yourself or blown off, because the story is pretty unbelievable. Racist Police, you need to stand up and distance yourself from Marijuana Prohibition. I realize that you yourself may or may not be racist jackasses, but evertime you speak out against pot or your representatives lie to congress about marijuana, you are nothing more than a racist pig like Harry Anslinger.