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?"

7 of 634 comments (clear)

  1. Yes! by Quaoar · · Score: 5, Funny

    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!
  2. Our laws, your country... by MosesJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:Our laws, your country... by slarabee · · Score: 5, Informative
      And the reason he wasn't arrested during the previous ten years of the gambling site's existence? He has passed through the United States multiple times in the past decade while participating in this orgy of criminal vice. He has even held press conferences in the United States during this time. Officials in the federal government were well aware Carruthers was in their jurisdiction yet have done nothing.

      Could it have something to do with a vote dealing with a ban on Internet gambling coming up in the legislature in the next couple weeks? Could it have something to do with the fact Carruthers has been a vocal opponent of the upcoming bill. Strange that. The man is arrested based on his involvement in running an Internet gambling company. Yet referencing the vote on banning Internet gambling requires using the future tense.

      Perhaps using a 1961 law that only questionably relates to the Internet and even more questionably relates to an individual operating out of a different country is not quite so sound...

      http://www.reason.com/sullum/072606.shtml

      http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2006/09/sullum_ on_internet_gambling_ar.php

  3. U.S. a no go zone by ConfusedSelfHating · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  4. Re:I dont see the logic in this by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Interesting

    WHEREAS ALL they NEED to do and HAD to do is to bar all access from u.s. to that u.k. site

    If the US government did that, then you'd be complaining about censorship.

    The problem is that this guy and his company accepted money from US citizens who were on US soil in exchange for providing a service that is illegal in the US. It would be trivial for him to refuse credit card transactions for cards where the address on record is in the US, and at least then he'd have plausible deniability. Of course, doing so destroys most of his market, so it's easy to see why he wouldn't do that.

  5. 17 / 135 points by inviolet · · Score: 5, Funny

    > L
    You are sitting in an airplane seat, in the coach section of an airliner. The airliner is descending.

    > I
    You are carrying:
    • briefcase
    • wallet
    • cellphone
    • car keys
    • ticket stub
    • sword
    • bloody axe

    >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
  6. Re:Common sense by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't laugh - a lot of people are paying extra so they won't have a stopover in the US on the way to another destination, just to avoid the hassles, even if they have never done anything wrong.

    This is just going to make the situation worse. The losers are the US air carriers, and services based in the US.