Slashdot Mirror
FBI Arrests Neteller Execs
Alcibaides writes "In a follow-up to the 2006 law attacking Internet gambling, the FBI arrested two former Neteller executives in 'connection with the creation and operation of an Internet payment services company that facilitated the transfer of billions of dollars of illegal gambling proceeds.' Apparently, the execs were 'ambushed' as they passed through the U.S. on connecting flights. Consequently, Neteller has dropped all gambling-related activity to U.S. customers, a move not expected for several months."
This should be interesting, to see how foreign countries react to the detention of their citizens for something so paltry...
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Note to self....
Don't ever take a flight that stops over in the US if I've done something that the US might not like, even if it's perfectly legal in my country.
Emerald Astrology
Well, I played too much online poker anyways.
I don't see why the federal government is making such a huge deal out of online gambling, aside from the fact that it is currently not taxed. I don't really think the government deserves any more money, but I'd rather pay a small tax on my gaming than have it outlawed as some mysteriously corrupt moral issue. Other than taxation, how is this any different from the government endorsed lottery or allowed casinos in Atlantic City and Vegas?
The warmaking industry is apparently a far safer place for an executive to be. After all, their products are only being used to kill people. It's not like they're offering a completely voluntary service like gambling, which of course is among the most terrible things that can be done. I mean, how dare somebody be given the ability to spend their money as they choose!
It is worrisome how the US is trying to enforce its law on the whole world.
Many companies/people operate fully within the law of the land they live in. If this is breaking a US law, then the US should work with that government to harmonize the laws.
This is similar to how Muslim courts found danish cartoonist guilty of depicting mohammed, and condemned them to death.
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
...the solution for these people who want to run a business like this is to never go to or trade within America. Ever.
What a sad state of affairs.
"It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
Not only will you be fingerprinted when you get here, there is a high chance of a search as well. Oh, and if you've broken any laws we don't like, even if you weren't in the US, we may just arrest you as you pass through. I'd say we are developing some isolationist policies, but then we are invading other countries at the same time, so I can't find any consistency within our foreign policy. Like the forgive illegal aliens push, while building a fence to prevent more...
Learn to love Alaska
...are they being charged with violating this new law, or with other laws that are already on the books? Since they haven't done anything but own stock in the company since 2005, one would think that they couldn't be accused of crimes they committed before they were classed as illegal...
Leaving aside for a moment the ridiculous two faced nature of American anti-gambling laws, this is just beyond a joke. As I understand it, the two former execs in question had left the company before the SAFE Port Act was passed. So they've been arrested for setting up a company that is 100% legal in their country of origin, and was legal at the time in the USA as well (in fact, it's still legal for non-gambling related payments), and they no longer have anything to do with the company in question, aside from still holding shares.
"Land of the free", huh? I'm lost for words. The American legal system is just a joke.
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
"connection with the creation and operation of an Internet payment services company that facilitated the transfer of billions of dollars of illegal gambling proceeds from United States citizens to the owners of various Internet gambling companies located overseas," Especially since according to the article they are not involved in the operation of Neteller and when the company was formed this law didn't exist.
A game has objectives and is competitive, anything else is just play
Anyone have any advice on the next best alternative to get funds out?
All of it. On Red. Repeat until there isn't any more there.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
The U.S. Internet Gambling laws were only passed because British companies were dominating the market. If it the law was passed for moral reasons as its proponents (and much of the press) reported, then why not shut down Las Vegas too?
It shows how one sided the U.S. is when it comes to trade. Britain is a loyal (sickeningly loyal) friend of the U.S., and look how they get treated. With friends and enemies alike, the U.S. like thugs and wonders why it's become so unpopular.
BTW U.S. = government and big business. Not talking about your average Joe, who is as much a victim as everyone else.
> I think we're a little annoyed at the prospect of doing another one.
I think everyone else is a little annoyed at that prospect too. But I don't really see what WW2 has to do with the US arresting noncitizens for violating US law.
there is no need to sign your posts. this isn't usenet. your username is right there above your post. stop it.
As a former employee of Neteller, I've got to say that this is a pretty scary situation.
Neteller wasn't a sketchy operation being run in some warehouse. It employed over 500 people in Canada and paid taxes to the government here.
The company had a lot of dealings with various state governments in the US and had agreed to several restrictions long before the recent bill passed that made online gambling in the US completely illegal.
The firm employed nearly 100 software developers, many were consultants and contractors that were flown in from california. I'm sure that I'm not the only ex-employee now concerned about having to deal with the US government in the future.
"It is worrisome how the US is trying to enforce its law on the whole world."
Respectfully, I have to call bullshit. It's not the US trying to enforce its law on the whole world. Its the US trying to enforce its laws within their borders. Gambling businesses are making money from people living within US borders where that business is illegal. If you violate US law, don't step foot within their borders. They may arrest you. Having said that, the US would do a whole lot better working with these folks for a share of the profits. It certainly is not unreasonable to say, "Give us a share for letting your business be legal in our jurisdiction". Besides, it might subsidize my income tax.
I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
Because all gambling isn't illegal means US government is protecting someone else's interests and its own profits -> tax revenue. Because there is alot of money going across the board, and taxes aren't paid. And none of these people are friends of Bush family. If there were, this little problem would silently go away. All in all, liberty in america it has become is for those who are with a largest pocketbook. It is pretty bad, but not as bad in some other places.
Though the fact that executive staff were not employed by the company anymore. What can they do? Put them into a jail? I smell political agenda there, not justice for preservation of liberty and freedom of the peoples of the country.
2c
I believe that e-passporte is still valid for US customers. I also believe that some sites will mail checks to the US.
So *this* is the reason there's no such thing as sterile transit through US airports. gfd.
I think Jon Stewart sums it up pretty well. Some things are so absurd they're actually funny.
Respectfully, I have to call bullshit. It's not the US trying to enforce its law on the whole world. Its the US trying to enforce its laws within their borders. Gambling businesses are making money from people living within US borders where that business is illegal. If you violate US law, don't step foot within their borders.
Why doesn't the US just be a bit more honest with its citizens and setup a Chinese style firewall around the entire country?
Much more honest for Americans to see a "The Bush administration is preventing you from gambling for your own good" page then to have the US attempting to enforce it's laws across the entire internet.
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
I thought maybe the US was trying to cut down on its chocolate intake. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutella
Internet gambling from the US results in (a) no taxes, (b) no regulation and (c) no oversight. Gambling in the US is one of the most regulated and watched industries there is. The assumption seems to be in the US that any sort of gambling is operated by organized crime and has the objective of cheating people. Why is this assumption here? Because it is true in the US. Las Vegas was controlled completely by the mob.
So, a large part of this is the assumption that people are being cheated because there is no oversight to prove otherwise. I don't know why they don't take that approach - lots of public service announcements about how all Internet gambling is cheating. The problem is that it may not be true - irrelevent to the US mindset.
Taxation is another aspect that isn't all that easy to fix. Again, without overside it would be impossible to assess taxes. Of course, the assumption by anyone in the gsming business in the US is that the casino is cheating on the taxes as well. Why? History in the US.
If you live in the US, send this message to the president. Let's make it clear what the people of the United States want.
The president's email address is: comments@whitehouse.gov
Subject: Release Neteller Execs
Two former NETELLER executives were detained while traveling separately through the United States yesterday (Jan. 15) in "connection with the creation and operation of an Internet payment services company that facilitated the transfer of billions of dollars of illegal gambling proceeds from United States citizens to the owners of various Internet gambling companies located overseas," according to the U.S. Attorney General's office of Southern New York.
The two executives are: Stephen Eric Lawrence and John David Lefebvre.
I don't know all the facts yet about these men--the full story will come out in time, but arrests like these men, Maher Arar, and Sklyarov make the United States look VERY bad. This is hurting our economy, our public image, and our relations with the rest of the world. This is encouraging (although not the cause of) people to oppose the United States on many levels, and I believe it is making the current terrorist situation worse.
These two men are Canadian citizens, and they have been arrested for performing an activity against a law which was not passed at that time, for a company which perfomed a legitimate service which was and still is legal under Canadian law. It is not the US's prerogative to enforce our view of the law against people in other nations.
Canada is one of our closest allies. By alienating them we are hurting ourselves.
We have to stop arresting businessmen who are traveling through the United States and performing legal legitimate services in other countries -- as long as they are not threatening our national security. It is an offense to those other countries' law and it will damage our Economy and public image. I only want what is best for the United States and Justice. I want to see the freedom for all that you so often preach.
I call for a quick release of all facts, and if necessary a presidential pardon of the two people involved. Show the world that the United States truly is the home of the free.
-=Lothsahn=-
"Why doesn't the US just be a bit more honest with its citizens and setup a Chinese style firewall around the entire country?
Much more honest for Americans to see a "The Bush administration is preventing you from gambling for your own good" page then to have the US attempting to enforce it's laws across the entire internet."
I can't argue with that in the least. But, everyone knows the US government is not exactly honest with their citizens, much less the world.
I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
What you are suggesting is very dangerous. If I put up a web page, it should sufficethat I comply with all local laws.
If I have to consider the laws of all nations in the world, I pretty much have to hire attorneys from each of the contries to review my website.
And I can not:
1. Enjoy fredom of expression (Illegal all over, including china)
2. Critizise leaders (putin, il-jung-sum, most communists and others)
3. Advertize alcoholic beverages (Illegal in many arab countires)
4. Have any sexual material (again illegal in many countires)
5. Have any religious material worshipping any other gods than allah
6. Have any religious material worshipping any other gods than jhave
7. Have any religious material worshipping any other gods than
8. Download music(illegal in USA)
An in many cases illegal means "To be stoned to death"
Is this what you advocate?
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
You "tried"? What makes you think you have to right to allow people to live their own lives? It wasn't your right to give in the first place. As for being annoyed at the prospect of 'doing another one', maybe you should vote some people into power who are intent on causing another one.
Arrest US software execs when they go abroad. Nazi memorabilia found using your search-engine/auction/etc, goto French jail. And so on. Raising the cost of stupidity is the only way to show some regimes.
The offline casinos, not just in the US, must love this action. I wonder how much they paid for it?
--
make install -not war
Seriously, Lefebvre is known here in Calgary (where he is from) for donating lots of money to various social causes and institutions. Now all he'll be donating is a lot of spare time to the US 'PMITA' system. What a shame that those backwards Americans are so high and mighty with their 'morals' and 'values' and what not. It's not like gambling is a huge crime either. Can't someone enjoy a night of online gambling in the privacy of their own home without big brother poking around? Where's the harm? If Lefebvre had been arrested here in Canada he would have got house arrest at the most. I'm sure he'll do some jail time in the states though. Sorry, it's not very often that Canada is good for too much. I have to flaunt it a bit.
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.htm l?id=9971c427-4587-4619-a577-8a8f991e72f1&k=66571
you do know you're supposed to pay taxes on it, right? (all gambling winnings). If you are audited you WILL be asked to explain what those deposits are for.
DO NOT DISTURB THE SE
The issue isn't the US enforcing its laws within its own border.
The real issue is the US enforcing laws made after the act.
Arresting someone for something that was legal at the time it was done is not reasonable.
I want to set up a proxy for people in China to use so they can avoid censorship. If I did this, and I ever visited China (which I hope to do some day), is there a chance I would be arrested if the Chinese government became aware of this hypothetical service and my identity? My assumption would be an affirmative “yes”, but what do any of you think? I am sure there are some international travelers on Slashdot who may do something similar.
Why bother.
They are charged with money laundering, not the UIGEA. That seems to be a bit of a stretch, but what do I know?
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
Its the US trying to enforce its laws within their borders.
In case you didn't notice, the site's based outside of the US, which means the crime's not being committed within the US.
And nothing came of it.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
It is worrisome how the US is trying to enforce its law on the whole world.
Not in this case. The violations in US law are alleged to have occurred within the US. I am afraid that if you are going to do business with people living in the US you are subject to US law. If you do this business illegally from a foriegn country and then travel to the US you are subject to prosecution within the US.
The US is not telling the Canadian government or Canadian citizens how to act in Canada. In fact all this protest is due to Canadians trying to export their laws and operating practices to the US. Not the other way around.
You're off by a power of ten there, buddy.
Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick Two.
Harmonizing laws is a really bad plan. That way, every time the law is wrong *everyone* is screwed. If the law is different in two different places, you have a chance you're in the place where you agree with the law; even if you're not, you can move.
No... the world is a much better place with other countries *not* harmonized with US law.
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
How wonderfully slashdot.
Oops! I think you're missing my point. Put anything you want on the internet. If your site is used by folks in country in a way that is illegal in their country, then if you come into that country you may very well be arrested. I'm not necessarily saying that's right, I'm saying that's the way the country's law works. You raised great points. Let me bring one you didn't...child porn. Do you think that if child porn is allowed in a country and is presented on the internet that viewers of that child porn should be allowed a free pass in countries where child porn is illegal? Should the purveyors of that child porn be allowed free access to travel countries where it is illegal?
If you knowingly break the law of a country you should definitely not visit within the reach of that country's short, or long arm of the law. Or...you may be arrested.
I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
Yep, and if you're in the UK you can probably get subsidies and have the PM shut down the investigation into how corrupt your arms company is.
Just when I flopped a straight, too.
creation and operation of an Internet payment services company that facilitated the transfer of billions of dollars of illegal gambling proceeds.
Not Paypal!!!
Oh wait, not this time...
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
So if some coffee shop owner who sells pot to American tourists comes to the US, he/she will be next? This is absolutly the sickest thing I have ever heard.
I am seriously considering abandoning my job of 10 years and studying to be a lawyer just to fight this outrageous abuse of power.
So I can gamble my stock market account in foreign companies, but I can't gamble on some sports bets. What if I drive down to Tijuana, place a bet at Caliente Sports Book? Will the Caliente owners be next.
I hope that clock strikes midnight soon, we need a fresh start.
What you are suggesting is very dangerous. If I put up a web page, it should sufficethat I comply with all local laws.
Unfortunately life is a little more complicated than that. This is a case of a company putting up a web page that results in people making illegal financial transactions in another country. The web page content per se is not a problem. It is the financial transactions that are. No country is going to give up it's power to regulate commerce. That is one of the most fundamental aspects of national soveriegnty. This could have just as easily been a sports gambling operation conducted by telephone in Great Britain taking bets from people living in the US. That is equally illegal.
The internet aspect of this is not what the problem is. It is the financial transactions that are.
"In case you didn't notice, the site's based outside of the US, which means the crime's not being committed within the US."
If a person, IN the US, is violating US law by accessing the site based outside of the US, then the person enabling that violation of US law will certainly be considered to also be violating US law. The primary violation is being committed in the US by the person accessing the site. The secondary violation is by the person outside of the country providing the content, at least as a conspirator. Drug dealers in South America are considered criminals for providing drugs to countries where drugs are illegal. What is the difference? Name one country that won't treat that as a violation of their laws. See my post above relating to child porn.
I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
You know I'd have a lot more sympathy for this point of view if the US were trying to extradite them from wherever they live. However these twits flew to the US by themselves! Would us Europeans object if a US spammer targetting EU citizens was arrested passing through Europe? Hmmmm.....food for thought at least.
I just bought a bunch of poker books and after a trip to the bahamas to play poker with a bunch of the pros, my interest in poker has gone back up. I just reopend my neteller account and was ready for action. Oops!
So really, is there any reason for this law? I mean, not a reason for the government, but for the people, you know... who the goverment should be making laws for.
Why does the US Government feel that they are entitled to get a cut of every single thing that we do? We payed taxes on the money we play poker with, AND if you make enough playing poker, you have to pay taxes on that! So what the hell do they want? Do they want to take a tax on every single hand played?
This is really just a disgusting show by our goverment where they are not even trying to be subtle in showing us that they can fuck with us whenever they want to.
You take it, I don't want it...
European countries (Germany, for example) have done the same to Americans.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
For those of you screaming that the US is engaged in trade protection because they don't outlaw gambling completely I would like to point out a few things. The US is a republic composed of individual states which have more power and authority than our federal government. As a result of this 99% of all the vices (gambling, alcohol, etc..) are controlled at the state level. What this means is that in the US there are certain localities that have approved gambling, but many others (in fact the majority of the country) that doesn't allow it (much like alcohol, yes there are dry counties in the US).
As a result of trying to maintain state harmony, US federal laws have long held the position that gambling by wire is Illegal. This current law is just an extension of that long historic policy (existing since the days of the telegraph). Not only is this to appease the states and localities that don't allow gambling but it's also because gambling draws organized crime, and without heavy regulation (and even with it in some cases) cheating by the casinos becomes the norm.
So contrary to what you may think, if online gambling were legal in the US it would be absolutely dominated by the large corporations that run the casinos in Vegas. These casinos would JUMP at the chance to be involved in online gambling if they could (as 10 years ago they tried quite extensively to lobby congress to allow it), so any lobbying by the industry now is simply to allow a fair playground of enforcement of the US gambling by wire laws that already exist. Regulation of an enterprise historically and currently used as the single largest source of illegal money laundering isn't a bad thing, and you will have trouble getting sympathy from any significant percentage of US citizens who are bombarded by stories of lives destroyed by gambling addictions. And really, much like any crime, if you market your crime to citizens of another country and knowingly break that countries laws you need to be careful where you travel. For example, if I was going to go to China I wouldn't want to have ever been tied to anti-china activity as it would likely get me arrested. As another example, lets consider the south American drug lords, they don't bring drugs into the US personally nor do they in some cases do anything illegal in their own countries (at least that they are willing to prosecute them for), but many are sought for extradition to the US because they engage in an activity that creates crime in the US. In reality this is no different, as gambling online is unequivocally illegal in the US, but there are corporations and casinos engaged in actively breaking US law. Much like the drug lords they will pursue them for creating the market to violate US law although I doubt they will seek extradition of anyone.
Lets just be clear, it had nothing to do with Britain dominating the industry, it had everything to do with preserving the current laws by adapting them to the internet. The industry is a victim of it's own success, had it remained small there might have never been action by the US congress, and the FBI wouldn't be trying to make an example of someone to try to scare the rest of the industry into not being active participants in the breaking of US law.
Finally, it's apparent whoever arrested them didn't really know what was going on. They couldn't bring a case against the men simply for the fact that it would violate habeas corpus. With no current active role in the company (if true) their case won't go past the preliminary hearing.
trollin' trollin' trollin, keep them posts a-trollin', trollin' trollin' trollin' ... uh ... trollhide?
there is no need to sign your posts. this isn't usenet. your username is right there above your post. stop it.
You do know that some aspects of internet gambling have always been illegal in the US due to the Wire Act of 1961? And these Neteller execs are being charged under this 1961 law, which was clearly not after the fact?
When U.S. forces are stationed in foreign countries, they are usually subject to a Status Of Forces Agreement, which states which country has jurisdiction for which crimes. I don't know if we have a SOFA with the new Iraqi government, but if I had to guess, I would guess that we do, and any military member raping an Iraqi woman would be subject to the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
Your lack of logic astounds me. If I sell you a gun legally in the US and you choose to take it somewhere you know possession of that gun is illegal, YOU take that risk. If I sell you a gun through the mail from somewhere it is legal to do so, to somewhere it is illegal, and then I choose to go to that same country where it is illegal, I would expect to possibly be arrested.
By the way, learn to type, or spell, or something to make yourself more intelligible...fucking chav...
I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
You are missing an important point about how the law relates to national souvereignity:
Murder is unlawful in most contries/states, but the juristicion to prosecute and punish rests solely with the county/state.
If you commit murder in Idaho, a California court can not convict you of that crime.
If you commit murder in Denmark, the US can not convict you of that crime.
This is part of international treaties that all memebers of the UN are signatories to.
however, over the last years, the US are in many areas violating this, and treat the entire world as US juristicion.
This includes areas like
1. Actions aganinst people/companies living/based in tax havens
2. Underage sex tourism
3. Online gambling
and other
(1) is mostly to get more tax revenue, (2) is beacause local juristicions is lax, and (3) is to protect national casinos that donate a lot of money to candidates.
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
Most sites you can just send money from one account to another, no reason to collude, because that could actually result in the site taking your money.
You take it, I don't want it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_U
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto
If this is breaking a US law, then the US should work with that government to harmonize the laws.
Why?
KFG
Of course many countries have long-arm statutes - however your examples are plain wrong.
Pinochet was charged by Spain for crimes against Spanish citizens living in Chile. Spain tried to have him extradited from the UK but failed. He returned to Chile where he died.
Milosevic was indicted by the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia for crimes against humanity and charges of violating the laws or customs of war and grave breaches of the Geneva Convention. The trial might have been in the Hague however the Netherlands was not the country prosecuting him.
So both these cases had very little to do with long-arm statutes.
WTF? The term "Grammar Nazis" is plural, and should not have any apostrophe in it.
... and then they built the supercollider.
is that these guys are not officers of the company, or employees. They are stockholders.
These two gentlemen founded what was a perfectly legal business in the Isle of Man, Neteller PLC, in 1999. Mr Lawrence resigned as a non-executive director of the Company on 13 October 2006 having stepped down as non-executive chairman of the Company on 11 May 2006. Mr Lefebvre resigned as a non-executive director of the Company on 15 December 2005.
With the passage of the "Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006" the activities of Neteller PLC in regard to transferring funds of US citizens for the purpose of gambling became illegal.
Think it through. If you founded, or are an 'owner' by virtue of stock holdings, of a company whose activities are declared illegal somewhere in the world, and you happen to pass through a territory of that country, you could be held, your passport take away, without recourse. Before you hop on that next international flight, is every company in your retirement plan's mutual funds squeaky clean in all places you might touch down?
PokerStars recommends that U.S. players use ePassporte for all their money transfer needs, as they are not accepting any transfers to or from NETeller or CentralCoin. I assume other poker sites are giving similar advice.
plus, there's always paper checks.
For the last year or so, I've been a professional online low-stakes poker player, and thanks to this asinine crusade launched by the Department of Justice, I'm soon to be out of a job. It simply blows me away that the horse-racing lobby was successful in exempting online horse tracks from the UIGEA (Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, attached to the Port Security Bill of 2006 at the last possible moment), while games of skill like poker, operated by enormous legitimate corporations, are snatched from my fingers as though I was a child playing with matches.
This whole thing smacks of everything that is wrong with the US legal system. Although I can still play online and withdraw money, the casual players that were my bread and butter are either going to stop playing, or more likely, never start. The chilling effect will be what kills online poker.
Er, since when does Malibu have an international airport?
r y07/Neteller%20Arrests%20PR.pdf
e r-founder-john-lefebvre-granted-bail-20070117.html
People seem to have gotten this case confused with an earlier one. David Carruthers, CEO of BetonSports PLC was, indeed arrested in July, 2006 while on layover in Dallas/Fort Worth.
John Lefebvre was arrested in Malibu, however.
The official DOJ press release:
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/Janua
Article citing the earlier arrest of David Caruthers while in transit:
http://www.point-spreads.com/news/industry/netell
Online gambling was taking money away from Native American casinos. They lobbied for the law. It's my understanding they used, you guessed it, Jack Abramoff in their efforts.
Speaking of indian casinos, the online sites possibly could get around the law by getting into business relationships with casinos in the U.S.
Hopefully, not the ones that bought the law.
How did slashdot become a repository for faulty logic and anti-US bigotry? I mean, granted, a lot of the people I met while working in the IT industry weren't exactly rocket-scientist material, but I always figured that as far as statistical averages go, people here should be more logical, intelligent, and informed than the majority of the western world.
Ah well. Anyway, to my main point: In order to grasp just how silly it is to complain about long-arm laws, all you have to do is realize that, technically speaking, Osama Bin Laden never committed any crimes while on US soil.
Thank you all for coming out, better luck next week!
I think the entire US foreign policy is run by the defense department. The plan, p!55 off one nation at a time until we can justify bombing them into oblivion and then making it the 60th state etc...in the union. If you're currently a member of the armed forces the worst thing that could happen is "world is peace." These guys would then have to go out and find real jobs. So yeah arresting people on connecting flights that pass through U.S airspace or land on U.S. soil is just one way to irritate people and make enemies.
Furthermore (I've said this many times before), I believe that the 2006 law was completely driven by the Vegas casinos. Making online gambling illegal does several great things for their cause: 1) It stops or greatly slows the unbelievable flood of cash leaving the US and going into the pockets of Party Poker, etc. 2) It forces the US lawmakers to decide whether or not poker is a form of gambling, and thus, illegal. That's the biggie. As part of the 2006 law, a committee was established to determine the answer to that exact question. And I'll bet you that the same dirty Vegas (read Mob) money that got that law passed in the first place is also going to ensure that the committee's decision is that poker is a "game of skill" and is therefore exempt from all this hooplah over online gambling. And presto, the Vegas bigwigs have an open door to legal online poker, which is by far the most lucrative form of online gambling.
Gateway Financial Services was the company that offered CentralCoin and Nexum ACH deposits. Those two deposit types just suddenly started returning errors today, and the CentralCoin.com web site says "We are sorry to inform you that the CentralCoin service is currently not operational". When they say "not operational" I'm assuming that they mean "not operational while we figure out if anyone from our company is going to be arrested too". Obviously the FBI's scare tactics are working.
Yes, ePassporte still works for U.S. players. But for how long?
Let assume there's two companies in that non-existent country where child porn is legal. One has a site, the other has only brochures. Should the executives of both companies be arrested when they travel outside their country? Both brochures and the web pages are available to visitors (of either the site or the country), so what's the difference? And if you think both should be arrested, then you'd be fine if a muslim country arrested the CEO of Budweiser for producing alcohol, right?
There's few international laws about this because it never has been an issue, and the USA is making it an issue, and they're wrong.
The bills and the work that this centers around is supported by both parties. That the Dems support this is not strange, the Democratic Party is about the government protecting and supporting the poor stupid population against them selves and others. As such the Dems are for limitations on individual freedoms, high taxes (to fund their government programs) etc.
The traditional platform for the Republican Party is the opposite. The individual is responsible for his own actions, has the ability to think for him self. The Republican party is therefore for small government, small taxes, no government control.
Sadly, the last few decades the Republican Party has turned into a totally different party. They are now for a huge central government (the Democrats have never spent this much public money on crap, even when you take the Iraq bill out of the budget). This enormous central government funds insane crap like in-door rain forests in Ohio. For now the money has generally been borrowed, but at some stage we have to pay that back. If we don't see a significant economic growth, that means higher taxes at some stage.
In addition to now being (far more so than the Dems) the big-government party, the Republicans also have become the party of government limitations on individual freedoms. I don't have the right to travel where I want. Did you know that there is now a law, pushed through from Florida of course, that says that if the government suspects me of planning to sail my private boat to Cuba, they can impound the boat? Of course the government, lead by these repugnicans, also don't want me to gamble online. On and on.
Since the republican party started taking directions from born-again, male-prostitute buying, crack-snorting religious nut cases, this country has been in a nose dive. More religion in Washington means more repugnicans, and that means more shit for the rest of us.
Any thinking individual who values individual freedoms, personal responsibility, no government meddling and all the other things the republican party used to stand for should voice their opinion. Say it out loud: "I don't like these people who turned The Republican Party into a Stalin-inspired left-wing nut cases with a Jesus twist. I will not vote for them.
Anyone who likes these freedoms and still votes republican needs a brain transplant. I've heard that the San Diego zoo are doing some experiments with chimpanzees. Maybe they have a brain or two extra. It would be a huge upgrade for anyone who voted republican the past 6 years.
Oh, and btw, though I would never vote Democrat, there is nothing wrong with those who do. The democratic party has a consistent platform in most ways. They favor government "oversight" over the individual. Fine, if that is what you thing society should be, more power to you, and vote for the Democratic Party. This is a free country and we like differences of opinion. If you are republican in nature and vote for the RHINOs currently in charge, you are what Carlos Mencia would call "dee-dee-dee".
were they arrested airside? because this sets a dangerous precedent... I was always under the impression that as long as you remained airside and haven't cleared through immigration, you were in international territory while passing through.
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
One thing that seperates Australia from the rest of the world is we don't pay income tax on gambling earnings. The only main cavert is as long as the winnings weren't gained as a professional gambler.
It makes it trival to do this in Australia.
Our recent poker champion took home $1 million AUD and didn't pay a cent in tax - World Series 2005.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Hachem
I'm not sure about his current status, he probably pays tax now given his elevated income and career changes.
I don't know about all the online casino's, but I actually worked on the win/lose algorithm's for one (poker, blackjack, machinepoker, roulette). The win/lose ratio is actually prescribed by law, IIRC e.g. the Antiguan government (lot's of online casino's are based in Antigua) says there should be a 97% win/lose ratio.
All gambling was random, but with corrections to get to this ratio. The most difficult part was to make the corrections feel natural for the players.
---
"The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
Ah, but we foreigners know that the FBI is completely trustworthy and above contempt!
/>
Just ask that contemptible scoundrel of international renown, Dmitry Sklyarov, just how just and fair and just the American legal system is!
<sarcasm
Yet another reason why I will stay in my comparitively safe, free and open little country. South Africa, please forgive me if I've said anything bad about you lately...
Part Time Philosopher, Oft Times Romantic, Full Time Unix Geek
And indeed your lack of customs knowledge astounds me.
If I order a gun from you (assuming you were in the US, though I doubt it from the flamebait at the end of your posting), the responsibility for knowing the appropriate local legislation of import and posession of that item lies with me, not you.
Now, there may be *export* regulations in the US that would apply to you, but as long as you comply with them, you are completely in the clear when landing on the soil of the country of destination (at least in the Free West that lies to the East of you). *You* may *expect* to possibly be arrested, but it wouldn't happen.
The company isn't running an online casino. Not that there's anything wrong with that in the UK.
The company is running an electronic wallet service. These guys aren't even working for the company - they are shareholders. Major shareholders, admittedly, but only shareholders nonetheless. This is the equivalent of the Feds arresting shareholders of Ebay FFS!
When they were running the company, what they were doing was perfectly legal at the time even in the US. This sucks. This is the suckiest suck that ever sucks.
This is the like the US introducing legislation next year making the use of the phrase "This is the suckiest suck that ever sucks." illegal on US soil, me then travelling *via* the US, and getting arrested for *this* post.
This is the suckiest suck that ever sucks! - See how I'm tempting fate here?
I had intended to write out a long paragraph in an attempt to explain jurispurdice, crime and punishment, human cultural diversity and western cultural snobbery. But instead of wasting my time, I'll just say that anyone who believes such people shouldn't get a free pass, should move to Iran or China or some other authoritarian regieme, because you'll feel much more at home there.
In conclusion, I would like to add that; I would rather have pictures of my childhood self in the hands of pedophiles, than have my own children live in a dictatorship.
May the Maths Be with you!
Keeping in mind:
- US collecting data from people flying there, for who knows which nefarious purposes.
- Track history of US government aprehending innocent people in airports.
- Kidnappings (euphemistically called "renditions") in order to let brutish governments do some bit of interrogation.
- Secrecy about charges or laws if you are unlucky to be indicted or held for something nasty.
- Guantanamo.
I think my visits to all those wonderful places in the US I wanted to see may need to be postponed for a while. I have not been to NY for goodness sakes...
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Why is the US so down on gambling? I've never been interested in it myself but compared to half the things available in the US, it seems pretty tame and the response to it like arresting CIO's etc seems pretty extreme. Did someone equate gambling with terrorism somewhere?
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
Like child trafficking? Let's say someone buys an old cruise ship, parks it 100 miles off the coast of Florida. They pay kidnappers to go into the US and kidnap children to be sold overseas. (So as not to fool with extradition laws which don't apply here.)
Now, let's assume (because IANAL) that they are in international waters, and that what they are doing are not against international law (actually, I think this IS covered under some type of international slave trade laws or treaties, but this is just an example). What would the US do? They'd probably send in a team of Marines. They are US citizens, and so the US should have a right to get involved internationally over them.
Ok, let's move to something that is actual property. Let's say instead of children, they started stealing art or gold from the US. Well, they are in possession of stolen property. The US will claim the right to go after that which is owned in the US.
What about currency?
Look on your cash. It is property of the US government. I read a copy of "DAMAGE TO PROPERTY (COMPENSATION) ACT, 1923 SECTION 15" (Google for it, the link I found was dead, had to read cache) states wrongful damage as damage to US currency, or even that of another country's currency.
So, the US owns the dollar. They can determine its value. They could, tomorrow, print up a completely different looking bill, and say that the previous bills are all worthless. They can also prosecute your for damaging their money.
So, as the currency is the government's property, then when you play with US currency, you are playing with government property. And, if they say it is illegal to do X with their property, gaining it by ill gotten means, ie - theft, they can and will arrest you the moment you step foot on US soil.
Again, I have not read this law, my explanation may be full of holes. But if currency is the property of the US, then any crime you commit anywhere in the world with that property, you are committing against the US, regardless of where you or those you deal with physically are.
Yeah, that basically means the US is saying, "Any crime you commit using our property, we can try you for."
On the other hand, these guys have no way out of this. I mean, they can't claim diplomatic immunity. Yes, they most certainly are subject to US law once in the US. Now, whether they can successfully argue in court that no crime was committed while they were in the US... I doubt, considering their business was in operation at the time of their arrest. Then, of course, that they have no legal consent clauses in any banking contracts (making them subject to US law) or the legal property of the US issue.
Now, do I agree with this? No. For instance, France, for instance, could make criminal an explicit legal right of another country's citizen. An American who ran a WWII war memorabilia website in the US shouldn't be imprisoned in France because the sale of Nazi articles is illegal there... Then again, this is really the same issue. What if that site owner takes "French property" in exchange for an item illegal there? Does France then have the right to arrest them if they enter French soil? That, in a nutshell is EXACTLY what happened here. Could it happen in that case too?
Quite possibly. And that's why country's rarely fight for citizens who are already on foreign soil unless they see it as a violation of human rights or an attack on their home country.
I8-D
No, these two gentlemen are allegedly behind offering a service they know to be illegal to the US.
Think of a Columbian drug lord. He never steps foot in the US, but he is trafficing an illegal good for sale inside the US. Does this make him immune to arrest should he fly through some US airport?
Yes, the analogy is extreme, but you get the point. I'm not here to argue if online gambling should be legal or not.. the fact is that it is NOT legal and you should be prepared to face the consequences if you offer the service to people living in the US.
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
I am so bloody tired of this nanny-state mentality the US (where I reside) seems to have towards it's own citizens and the citizen of the world.
IF gambling is a problem - it's a social one, not criminal (state lotteries, anyone?)
IF prostitution is a problem - it's a social one, not criminal
IF drug abuse is a problem - it's a social one, not criminal
IF alcohol use is a problem - it's a social one, not criminal
The nanny-state list goes on and on - fill in your own blanks _________
The bottom line here is that the government isn't getting a freaking cut of the action (taxes) and THAT'S what they're truly peeved about.
No society in the history of the universe has succeeded in legislating morality.
1 in 4 Maine children in struggle with hunger.
Having an English website based outside of the United States is not illegal, nor should you be legally responsible for what U.S. citizens do on your English website. If it's illegal for Americans to gamble online, that's their own fault for doing so, not mine. How one can't decipher the difference between this and lobbing rpgs across the border I don't know.
Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
Internet gambling is not conducted here in the US.
The US has no way to tax the proceeds of the gambler or the site.
The US government does not want anybody to make money here in the US
and not pay taxes on that money.
So how do you get the tax revenue?
You can't, so what do you do?
You make it against the law and use "Morals" to justify your actions.
Everyone seems to forget that our country was founded by crooks, outlaws, and the religious right.
So when you ask why are we against gambling, we are not, as long as we can tax the crap out of it
and the government can get their share of the profit.
-- I am the NRA, enough said...
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article158 8670.ece
I think that the worst thing in both examples, online gambling and targeting Cuban tourists, is that the law that the US is trying to impose on citizens of other countries is basically bad laws, done for the wrong reasons. Laws introduced by paying hard cash or by political postering, not for making the country function better.
--- guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people ---
Actually, gambling online in the US isn't illegal at a federal level. It's only illegal in those states that have laws against it (New York, and two others I think). What the new legislation made illegal was processing funds to and from betting operations. The end-user (the gambler) still does not commit a crime.
That's just silly. How could one possibly compare gambling with rape? Gambling is clearly forbidden in the Bible, which we all know to be the foundation of the laws of the United States. Rape, however, is just fine with God. Consider Lot's offer of his daughters to the mob, which pleased the Lord God mightily.
Is the US legally at war with Iraq or not?
A messy question indeed. No declaration of war was ever passed, but then there is some dispute about what that actually means. There also seems to be some interesting manoeuvering involving the war status - sometimes the US government seems to find it convenient to think the US is at war, then at other times it is more convenient to say the country is not at war. A frequent example is when the question of "detainees" vs "prisoners of war" comes up.
Of course, any smart occupying force will ensure that the government of the occupied region signs all the right agreements.
Eventually it all comes down to an ethical (rather than a legal) question, and governments (pretty much everywhere) don't seem to have much in the way of ethics. But then can governments (as opposed to individuals) really have ethics? But then too, many individuals in government don't.
What you are suggesting is very dangerous. If I put up a web page, it should sufficethat I comply with all local laws.
I'd modify that to apply to the local laws of the country hosting your webpage not your local laws.
Still, this is very different from what the US is doing when it has neither juristiction nor citizenship.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
It's a good thing the government is protecting us from how we spend our money.
Given that they are Canadian citizens, and, more importantly, NO LONGER INVOLVED IN THE OPERATIONS OF NETTELLER, I think that the Canadian government will have something to say.
The government here is still smarting over the whole Arar affair, and I don't think they'll take it lightly that Canadian shareholders of a British company are being arrested while on US soil, because they created a company that provided a legal service - even legal in the US - when it was started.
Reason why there is hope for the future generation #364:
"I wish my grass was emo so it could cut itself."
Isn't this a bit of a reach? They weren't actually involved in any gaming. Isn't there someone willing to slap the US Government down Hard over this one?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Here is an interesting article: http://www.gambling911.com/Michael-Devlin-John-Lef ebvre-011807.html. In America, kidnapping and psychologically altering young boys is not as bad as running a legal service from another country, apparently. From the article: "Betting online in Washington State carries with it the same penalties as those imposed upon first time offender child molesters."
-Xoltri
Most articles I read suggest they are being charged under the more recent
"Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, which targeted illegal Internet gambling by preventing financial entities from processing credit cards, checks, and similar transactions in connection with Internet gambling. "
Other than government efficiency why would they make a new law to ban things already illegal under an old law?
I find it ludicrous that the US Government has made online gaming illegal. The only rational answer to this is that the corporations that now run Vegas feared competition from a new player running on a medium that did not require its players to fly to vegas, pay for a hotel, and sit in a highly controlled envirnment. Why else ban joe six pack from sitting at home and playing online poker?
this ir racist and so Bushy... dammit.
Do not. Touch. Down.
Not the ones I saw. Neteller has always been a very shady operation; in fact when the company went public several years ago they acknowledged that they were likely in violation of US laws. Here's a quote from a news article:
Garcia noted that the company acknowledged when it went public that U.S. law prohibited people from promoting certain forms of gambling, including Internet gambling and transmmitting funds that are known to have been derived from criminal activity.
What if you come into the jurisdiction? Are you able to be arrested then? That's where I was pointing.
I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
"And indeed your lack of customs knowledge astounds me."
My point has nothing to do with customs law.
"If I order a gun from you (assuming you were in the US, though I doubt it from the flamebait at the end of your posting), the responsibility for knowing the appropriate local legislation of import and posession of that item lies with me, not you."
Actually, it doesn't matter in the mind of the law as to WHO "should" have knowledge of the law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. As per my example, I'm a US resident who sold and shipped a weapon that was illegal in the recipient's country. Maybe I followed my local law as far as customs and export but I broke the importation and customs law of the recipient's country. If I show up in that country I certainly could expect to be arrested for violating their law...illegal importation of a firearm. It matters naught that I followed my own country's law.
I see a parallel for internet content. If I provide content/service to a country where that content/service is illegal, then I sure as hell could be arrested if I show up in that country.
As an aside, I am from the US. I chose to flame that moron with a slang term they would understand, considering they are obviously a rectal orifice of tremendous proportion, lacking wisdom, and from the UK. To you I say, with respect, thank you for an intelligent and thoughtful reply. Because you showed intelligence, wisdom, and respect, I've tried to reply in the same manner. If I were to call you a name, it would be...peer...maybe even friend.
I reserve the right to think for myself. Others' opinions are optional. Puppy on lap = typos...not illiteracy.
Prima recommended I switch to Click2Pay as an alternative, but lo and behold, when I tried to create an account with them, I couldn't. Support gave me the following explanation:
Dear Sir or Madam
Thank you for contacting the CLICK2PAY Service Team.
Due to the existing US legal situation the decision has been taken to not accept any new sign-ups from US players. Please respect our decision in this regard.
Kind regards
CLICK2PAY Service Team
Re:US is trying to enforce its law on the whole world/
Well, they do have several justifications. For example:
- A large and active military force, leading the world in military spending by a large margin.
- A large arsenal of WMDs with excellent deployment capabilities (not to mention being the only country ever known to have used nuclear weapons in combat).
- An extensive list of military interventions across the globe and demonstrate willingness to employ its military to protect its business interests.
- Willingness to impose economical sanctions to protect said interests.
The US is currently the biggest and meanest bully in the schoolyard and will pick on anybody who it perceives as weaker or less aggressive.
And all the talk about democracy, freedom and justice? Just propaganda. Similar to naming your country "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" and suchlike.
And that wasn't a troll? The slashdotters are fucked.
But it should have done. Extend the "county law" analogy a little. It is illegal to sell alcohol in Bridgewater, CO. Were someone to sell you alcohol in Bridgewater, they would be subject to punishment under the law. Were a citizen on Bridgewater to travel to, say, Miami and drink, they would not be breaking the law, neither would the bartender. Should the bartender be subject to arrest were he to visit Bridgewater? Ignorance of the law is indeed no excuse - however no laws were broken by these individuals. This is the point.
As an aside, WRT the firearms, you would not be arrested for violating a law of illegal importation of a firearm. You are not importing in this case - you are exporting. This is the point. Your liability ends once the goods travel properly through customs at your end. Provided you have valid export licenses in place you're in the clear. It's precisely this manner that allowed British arms manufacturers to (allegedly) supply arms to countries on the prohibited list in the 80s and 90s - the arms would be routed through successively more lax countries so no prohibition were expressly broken.