Slashdot Mirror


Responding to US Gambling Law, Antigua Set To Launch "Pirate" Site

An anonymous reader writes "The Government of Antigua is planning to launch a website selling movies, music and software, without paying U.S. copyright holders. The Caribbean island is taking the unprecedented step because the United States refuses to lift a trade 'blockade' preventing the island from offering Internet gambling services, despite several WTO decisions in Antigua's favor. The country now hopes to recoup some of the lost income through a WTO approved 'warez' site."

58 of 377 comments (clear)

  1. disney will object by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    if they call the site "Pirates of the Caribbean"

    1. Re:disney will object by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 3, Funny

      if they call the site "Pirates of the Caribbean"

      Well, if cannibalism were legal and Caribbean were in the EU, they could ask for a Protected Designation of Origin and Disney would be left out in the cold, since they are not in the Caribbean and Antigua is.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  2. Payment processors by Enderandrew · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The United States can't really stop Antigua from running a gambling website.

    They can however forbid US payment processors from processing online gambling payments. If that is how they're stopping Antigua now, I can't imagine this warez site will be different. Do you think US payment processors will handle these payments?

    --
    http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    1. Re:Payment processors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, but do you think that for an all-you-can-eat direct download netflix-style warez smorgasboard people won't find a way to buy a few bitcoins? :)

    2. Re:Payment processors by WoOS · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The USA can definitely block payments from its citizens by enacting an appropriate law. But then there is the rest of the world.
      And with it comes a catch. If the US goverment forced e.g. American Express to not process transactions from non-US citizens with Antigua, it might cause those non-US citizens to change to e.g. Master Card or another non-US based payments processor, weakening American Express and thus the US economy.
      Of course the U.S. could threaten any payment processor - U.S.-based or not - with sanctions but since Antigua's move seems to be a WTO-approved measure, those sanctions would probably be found illegal again by the WTO allowing further compensations. And soon we are in a full-scale economic war.

      All that just because of $21 million yearly revenue loss of the US media industry (which is what the WTO allowed Antigua)?

    3. Re:Payment processors by amiga3D · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm not sure the United Corporations of America really care that much about what the WTO thinks.

    4. Re:Payment processors by localman57 · · Score: 5, Funny

      All that just because of $21 million yearly revenue loss of the US media industry (which is what the WTO allowed Antigua)?

      Can the Antiguans set their own prices? Maybe 1000 movies for a penny? That would let them sell 2 trillion downloads. Not a good way to make money, but kind of a funny way to make the Yankee media companies take it in the shorts...

    5. Re:Payment processors by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Of course the U.S. could threaten any payment processor - U.S.-based or not - with sanctions but since Antigua's move seems to be a WTO-approved measure, those sanctions would probably be found illegal again by the WTO allowing further compensations. And soon we are in a full-scale economic war.

      That's actually been happening for some time. The dollar has been on a steady decline for years as more governments and business opt for other forms of currency. The US has reacted by taking unilateral action like this -- essentially doing everything they can to strong-arm the financial world into doing things their way or else. This is one of the motivating reasons behind the creation of the EU. It's the same with the internet, and why the UN is fussing over getting power away from the United States: Especially since we're now talking about creating an "internet kill switch" and are deploying cyberwarfare weapons targetting economic infrastructure of other countries. It's nuts out there. It's no surprise the rest of the world is slowly ganging up on the 3000 ton gorilla in the room and saying "Enough is enough."

      Many countries' relationships with the US have soured due to economic policy. Most of the middle east, for example. Many countries are rejecting our "intellectual property" non-sense as just another way of maintaining economic superiority... and Antigua just called their bluff. The US now either has to throw the country into the same category as, say, Cuba, which will prompt an even stronger international response, or back off.

      I think you know what my vote is: The US would rather implode than admit it was wrong.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    6. Re:Payment processors by ak3ldama · · Score: 4, Interesting

      See the "choice" of the US to subsidize cotton growers in Brazil due to the WTO and Brazillian influence upon US Coorporations. This is one of those things that the typical media does not like to cover but NPR did. It is also one of those things, that once you hear about, you don't forget. So you are sort of correct: we do not care at all about what the WTO thinks until we are persuaded otherwise.

      --
      "but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
    7. Re:Payment processors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually the US government CAN'T stop US Banks from processing legal purchases in other countries. That is the whole point of the violation of WTO treaties. This isn't some Islamic country that has a total blackout on all gambling. The USA legally sanctions all kinds of gambling internally, from rule-bending Indian Casinos, to interstate Powerball, to various sports betting operations. So the USA Federal government is overstepping IT's OWN internal laws to block an international gambling site.

      The USA doesn't enforce child labor laws, rights to unions, and many other things that are basic morality here in the USA when "fair trade" is in play to make a few bucks. So the USA has no precedent to pick one arbitrary moral item to ban.

    8. Re:Payment processors by Zephyn · · Score: 4, Informative

      But that's the same situation with the gambling website. Antigua can run a gambling website and the entire rest of the world can frequent it.

      Antigua is arguing that they should be able to have a business that caters to US customers with no afford to US law.

      I have no moral problem with gambling myself, but I don't see how this will help Antigua's case. They still won't get US money and reselling digital goods that you don't own is just going to cost them the support they currently have from the WTO.

      Recheck the last sentence from the summary. Specifically the "WTO-approved" bit.

      Since the WTO doesn't have the authority to directly countermand the trade laws of its member nations, the way it deals with nations that defy its rulings is by permitting the injured party to retaliate with its own trade laws. In this case, the WTO ruled in 2007 that Antigua could retaliate against US trademarks and copyrights. So no... Antigua isn't going to suffer any sanction from the WTO for doing this.... in fact, it technically is a WTO sanction against the US.

    9. Re:Payment processors by number11 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have no moral problem with gambling myself, but I don't see how this will help Antigua's case. They still won't get US money and reselling digital goods that you don't own is just going to cost them the support they currently have from the WTO.

      The "ownership" of these digital goods has value only due to the government-bestowed monopoly rights that copyright comes with. The WTO ruled that the government of Antigua was exempt from those monopoly rights, due to violations of the law by the government of the USA. The WTO are the ones telling Antigua that they can do it, that doing it is a remedy for the violations of the USA. Why would the WTO then be upset if Antigua does it? That's how the WTO enforces its rulings when faced with scofflaws.

    10. Re:Payment processors by localman57 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe 1000 movies for a penny? That would let them sell 2 trillion downloads.

      In other news, Market Analysts made note of a number of very large stock buys today by the Antiguan National Retirement Fund (ANRF). The buys seemed largely to target hard drive and blank media manufacturers.

    11. Re:Payment processors by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Antigua is arguing that they should be able to have a business that caters to US customers with no afford to US law.

      You misunderstand. The reason that the WTO sided with Antigua (and allowed Antigua to take the action it is planning) is that the US allows its citizens to gamble. In banning US citizens from gambling on Antigua, the US was not taking a moral stance, but instead was taking an anti-free trade stance.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  3. I Don't Get It by eldavojohn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Caribbean island is taking the unprecedented step because the United States refuses to lift a trade "blockade" preventing the island from offering Internet gambling services, despite several WTO decisions in Antigua's favor. The country now hopes to recoup some of the lost income through a WTO approved 'warez' site.

    I'm pretty sure Antigua and Barbuda attended and signed the Berne Convention and have joined WIPO. Furthermore I believe the WTO is fully on board with all that considering their TRIPS agreement. So how in the hell is there such a thing as "a WTO approved 'warez' site" and how on Earth does Antigua think the WIPO is going to view this?

    Note: I'm not saying what they're doing is wrong or right, I'm just asking how they are doing it given their history. I mean, sure, this stuff happens all over China but the government pays all the copyright holders lip service about how they're cracking down on it. If the Chinese government profits from it, they don't do so flagrantly like this appears to.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:I Don't Get It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      According to the WTO, the agreement the US signed, the aggrieved party can extract restitution in the form of selling the offending parties IP. It is all there in the treaty.

    2. Re:I Don't Get It by Hatta · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you break a treaty with a foreign country, you have no reason to expect that country to respect other treaties you have with them. Since the WTO can't put the US in jail, it has to work with the tools it has.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:I Don't Get It by Sloppy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They're doing it flagrantly because it's explicitly tit-for-tat. It's their way of pointedly asking "Do we have rules or not?"

      Let's say you and I are sociopathic assholes, so whereas most people might have some kind of implicit social contract, and a sense of how people should act decently to one another, we're jerks and write up and agree to some formal rules. Among these rules are things like "Neither party will ever hit the other in the head with a hammer and then steal their wallet while the victim is incapacitated." Call that the WIPO rule.

      We have another rule too. It's "Neither party will ever vandalize the other's car." Call that the WTO rule.

      Then I go and vandalize your car, totally in violation of the rules. I don't deny it, either. Instead, I explain I had good reasons to do it. "I really wanted to vandalize your car, and it looked so vulnerable. I just couldn't help it!" but whether I had a good reason or not, you claim I broke our agreement. You might not feel all that hurt about the car, but breaking the agreement .. oh dear. We're sociopaths, but we're not uncivilized, are we?

      After my amazing explanation for why I did it, you ask me: "Are you going to do it again?" and I answer "Yeah, probably. Your car still does look pretty vandalizable, and I really like vandalizing cars." You answer "What about our agreement?" and I just shrug. You ask, "Are our agreements important?" and I shrug again!!

      You go see our mutual acquaintances, perhaps some people with whom I also have some agreements. They're a little concerned to hear I value our agreements so little. Will their cars be next? They think it over and say, "Yeah, Sloppy broke his agreement to not vandalize your car. You should get even."

      So you do. You hit me in the head with a hammer and I wake up without a wallet. You do it openly, too. Our acquaintances nod with approval, even though you're breaking the agreement now. I ask, "How can you do that?!?"

      You explain: if I think the rules are so important, and I have such a problem with being hit with hammers, THEN MAYBE I SHOULD STOP FUCKING AROUND WITH OTHER PEOPLE'S CARS.

      I don't know what I'll do. I still really do like vandalizing cars. I'd like to vandalize your car again, and that other dude with whom I have a no-vandalize agreement. But I'm not sure I like this hammers development. OTOH, I don't know, maybe it's worth it. The hammers hurt and I don't like losing my wallet all the time, but the cars! Oh, the cars! That's so much fun.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  4. Nothing new. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The US imposes its economic interests and cultural values on other sovereign nations every day.

    The US has de facto jurisdiction almost everywhere on this planet, and there's nothing we can do about it as we don't get a vote, we're not Americans, we're just backward savages who don't understand what democracy and freedom means.

    We are allowed to elect our leaders, as long as they are friendly to US interests. As a result we a free to be exploited by the US government and US based corporations in the guise of 'free trade', which in practice means the US government and certain corporations are free to acquire the natural assets of the client states ensuring the local population never sees the benefits.

  5. Business plan? by Hatta · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Are they going to be charging for these downloads? Or are they going to be making their money through ads, the way MegaUpload did?

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Business plan? by Rigrig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Possibly their business plan is to have the MAFIAA bribe^Wlobby the US government into complying with the WTO ruling, then rebuild their gambling industry?

      --
      **TODO** [X] Steal someone elses sig.
  6. NOOOOOOO! by cristiroma · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's goatse!!!!!!!!!!!

  7. Re:Who loves USA by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 3, Informative

    The US has had a trade deficit for almost 40 years ...

  8. Re:Who loves USA by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As far as foreign policy goes? Israel. Duh. They might be acting upset that Obama would dare suggest it's even possible that what they're doing could be wrong, but they still know the US and Obama are more pro-Israel than most of the world, and certainly anyone nearby.

    As far as the country itself? I'm guessing there are a few countries smart enough to realize that our trade policy isn't the best way to define a whole country.

  9. Did you pay for that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or did Jamaica copy of it?

    Old pirates, yes, they rob I;
    Put my music on computer chips,
    Minutes after it came out
    Dey had da dvd rips.
    But my encryption was made strong
    And de tracker updated nightly.
    We download in this generation
    Triumphantly.

    Emancipate yourselves from license slavery;
    None but ourselves can free our minds.
    Have no fear for music industry,
    'Cause none of them can stop the files.
    How long shall they make their profits,
    While we stand aside and look? Ooh!
    We need movies and songs and games
    Don't forget e-books

  10. Re:Who loves USA by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Australia. Australia desperately wants to be just like the US, good and bad (mostly bad).

  11. Re:Who loves USA by Bearhouse · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, I hear the Pakistanis are REAL fans..

  12. Re:Thanks, Antigua! by AK+Marc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The US illegally abuses Antigua over IP, so Antigua abuses back. If the US respected rule of law and such, they'd not have started this mess. What a way to build a country indeed.

  13. Re:Hiring Kim Dotcom! by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "They cannot dictate our laws, regardless of if those laws are dumb."

    I didn't see anything about Antigua stopping the US from having copyright law.

    I DO see you demanding that Antigua copy and mirror *US* copyright law.

    And "taking other people's stuff?" No. Even the Supreme Court says you aren't right about that, they ruled that copyright violation is not theft. It's copyright violation.

    And until the US started "dictating their laws" other countries had very different ideas on copyright.

    --
    This space available.
  14. Re:Hiring Kim Dotcom! by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Want an analogy? American alcohol companies get pissed they're not allowed to sell to Shariah-law nations, so the US decides to just steal their shit until they capitulate. Commodore Perry type shit. That's what this is. It's bad for everybody.

    No, the analogy is flawed because US sites do online gambling. The analogy is if the US blocked all Toyotas from being sold because it would help GM make more money faster, while GM was still able to make all they wanted. Toyota/Japan complains it violates a treaty, and the US tells them "yes it does, go fuck yourself" and Japan wins the lawsuit in international court. The US fails to abide by their treaty they signed and ratified, so the international body agrees to waive other terms of the treaty that were binding on Japan.

    This isn't about them being wronged, it's about them not respecting the sovereignty of another nation. They cannot dictate our laws, regardless of if those laws are dumb.

    So, if the rest of the world doesn't respect US copyrights, but instead writes their own independent laws, we should invade them and kill them for not giving us the profit we feel we are due?

  15. Re:Who loves USA by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Informative

    He's talking about hand outs give to nations, not commerce.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  16. Re:Hiring Kim Dotcom! by Drishmung · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FUCK'S SAKE! I don't AGREE with the anti-internet-gambling laws, I think they're full of shit -- BUT THIS SHIT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. Antigua needs to get the fuck over it and move on.

    Why? Or, why Antigua? Why doesn't the USA just get over it and follow the law?

    Want an analogy? American alcohol companies get pissed they're not allowed to sell to Shariah-law nations, so the US decides to just steal their shit until they capitulate.

    Not a good analogy. Neither American nor local companies can sell alcohol in such countries. The beef is that the USA is protecting its local gambling but forbidding international competition, which it has agreed not to do through its membership in the WTO

    If I wrote a novel and Antigua started selling it, undercutting me and not compensating me in any way.. yes it would be just about time to grab your guns. This isn't about them being wronged, it's about them not respecting the sovereignty of another nation. They cannot dictate our laws, regardless of if those laws are dumb.

    Copyright in stuff you write only extends outside the USA because of agreements with other sovereign nations. If the USA unilaterally breaks those agreements, then it's reasonable for the other parties to reciprocate. And yes, that means YOU got screwed. By your government. Not, actually, by the other nation. Direct your bile accordingly.

    --
    Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
  17. This isn't the USA by istartedi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is a rogue band of corporate fascists who have hijacked us. If you define them as the USA, then even the USA doesn't like the USA. So, speaking as a real American I say, "go for it"!

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  18. Time for US to assist with democratic reform by detain · · Score: 4, Funny

    It sounds like a great time to install a pro-US democratic leader. Clearly the people are not being represented here by corrupt Antiguan monarchs and need our help. God bless America.

    --
    http://interserver.net/
  19. Re:Who loves USA by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The prime minister, ambassador, king, el presidente.......whatever you call him to his face, is still a politician in his country of origin and very likely to represent the sentiment of his populace when describing his sentiment for yours. And by the by, there's the answer to your foreign policy question of the demi-decade, "Why do we continue to support Israel, at the expense of relations with every Arabian Middle Eastern Nation?" Because if there was a fight at the bar we all go to, we could be quite certain the Israelis and Brits would get beat up with us (and maybe even the Canadians and the Aussies). After that it gets pretty thin. Whether or not we kick Israel to the curb, no Muslim nation is really in our Alliance for a coon's age.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  20. Re:Hiring Kim Dotcom! by tlhIngan · · Score: 3

    A WTO-approved (WTO.. what a fucking load of shitfuckery THAT is) piracy campaign? That will have an effect on me, and you, personally.

    This is someone taking someone else's shit, making money off it, and not a dime reaching the content creators (or distributors, but I don't have much care for them...). That's wrong. Flat out unambiguously wrong. Hey, wanna argue multinationals take other people's shit (resources) without compensation (money to the people)? Make that argument, but almost without exception that shit *is* paid for... it's just that the peoples of those nations are kinda getting fucked in the ass by their government first and foremost (as is the habit of government).

    FUCK'S SAKE! I don't AGREE with the anti-internet-gambling laws, I think they're full of shit -- BUT THIS SHIT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. Antigua needs to get the fuck over it and move on.

    Reread your history. Antigua ran some pretty big online gambling sites - it was so big 5% of their workforce worked in the industry. Then the US applied pressure to cut off payments to Antigua's online gaming sites.

    So Antigua retaliated through the WTO. No, it's not like selling alcohol to Shariah nations because the US isn't preventing that (it's the Shariah nations blocking imports) - it's more like the US cutting off sales of French wine by pressuring the banks to not allow payments to French wineries.

    The WTO has continually stated (for over 5 years now) that Antigua is in the right and the US has enacted an unfair trade restriction, and to compensate for the loss of a significant part of the local economy, the WTO authorizes a suspension of $21M of copyright royalties annually until the US withdraws its trade block. The first dollar after that has to be paid to the US.

    And don't think the US is very innocent in all this - the US is WELL KNOWN for ignoring the WTO when it doesn't suit them, and for enforcing the WTO rulings when it does. Just this time, one country actually has the balls to enforce the ruling against the US. Most other countries capitulate and even though they're in the right, they agree to whatever the US demands.

    And $21M is but a drop in the water for the US entertainment industry (which does things in the billions). Hell, the RIAA/MPAA/etc argue they lose billions every year to piracy. $21M? Rounding error.

    The biggest arguments going around is how much $21M is actually worth - does Antigua get to charge a penny? Or less? Or more?

    And yes, it's supposed to disrupt the entertainment industry - perhaps by getting them to lobby for removal of whatever trade restriction there is. That's the entire point - the WTO is fed up with the US ignoring its rulings when it doesn't suit them.

  21. Re:The USA representative does not understand the by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Never mind that old "piracy is not theft" bit. The really funny part is the "government-authorized piracy" line - that sounds like the very definition of copyright in the first place since copyright is purely a government created exception to the natural right to freedom of expression.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  22. Re:Thanks, Antigua! by oreaq · · Score: 5, Informative

    You have pretty much all of your facts wrong. Here's the cliff notes:

    Antigua believed the US effort to prevent Antigua-licensed online gambling companies from offering services to US punters was in violation of international trade law. In 2005, a World Trade Organization (WTO) appellate body agreed, and told the US to either shut down its domestic online horse betting operations or allow Antigua equal access. Instead, America chose ‘none of the above’ and in 2007 the WTO ruled Antigua was owed an annual $21m in compensatory damages. If the US refused to pay, the WTO authorized Antigua to collect by other means, such as disregarding US copyrights to a value equal to the annual damages owed.

  23. Re:Thanks, Antigua! by AK+Marc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    US has the right to control gambling within its borders.
    They pass a law limiting US based citizens from from accessing these sites and or banks from transferring money to those sites.

    While at the same time publicly and officially supporting online gambling, so long as it was within the US. A breach of a treaty the US agreed to.

    And you are ok with this?

    Yes.

    Go back, reread what I just wrote, swapping Antigua for the US and vice-versa. Would you STILL feel the same way if the US declared all Antiguan copyrights fair game, simply because Antigua didn't want some predatory US industry doing business in their country?

    The US is quite happy with the "predatory industry" so long as it's US companies preying on US residents. I'd be happy with it going the other way, but it *never* is. I was happy with Allofmp3, who violated no law, Russian, American, or international. But they were shut down because of US bribes and threats. Again, the US bullies internationally and ignores any law they don't like, or makes up ones they wish existed (see Kim Dotcom case falling apart in NZ and the court agreeing that the FBI involvement was illegal).

    Why shouldn't Antigua honor US Gambling laws when doing business in the US?

    They did. They were shut down anyway. Did you miss that point in the whole thing? They followed the laws a US gambling site would have to operate under (other than being in the US), and the US shut them down anyway.

  24. Re:Who loves USA by bitt3n · · Score: 5, Funny

    have any evidence of that, idiot?

    if anything, it's the reverse: at the present rate of incarceration, every US citizen will be a convict by 2076, which is basically how Australia started out

  25. Re:Who loves USA by c0lo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    have any evidence of that, idiot?

    He's right. Maybe the majority of Ozzies doesn't, but the Ozzie politicians want to be just like US, mostly the bad part. And, if Ozzies do nothing about, it is the politicians that matter.

    * Remember David Hicks? Schapelle Corby had more support from the Howard govt then him.
    * Remember Gillard's reaction to Assange's Cablegate? Mastercard used it as a pretext for cutting the transfer of donations to Wikileaks.
    * Have you heard of serious "cyber terror" threats in Australia? Gillard says you should be very afraid of it, give away some of you rights and have that "cyber security centre" operational (doesn't matter that the budget for the centre may or may not exists, Roxon - the AG - just can't wait to use the "scare" to push some laws)
    * Wonder how the Australia's seat on UN Security Council is seen by its major trading partner, the one that kept Australia sheltered from GFC? Potential sycophancy ... would they be right, who's ass Australia is most likely to kiss?

    --
    Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  26. Re:Thanks, Antigua! by Jmc23 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's too funny. USians use the WTO to try and fuck over other countries all the time, then ignore the WTO everytime it does something illegal, like stealing canadian lumber.

    --
    Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  27. Re:Thanks, Antigua! by icebike · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The fact that the US authorizes gambling in the US is not germane.
    The US Authorizes the sale of Cigarettes in the US too. Doesn't mean you can start mail ordering them over the internet.

    You conveniently seem to forget that Gambling EVERYWHERE in the US is regulated by the US, Various States, and Various Tribes under the BIA/OIG.
    And as such there is some measure of control and taxation, and control of the odds, inspection of hardware, etc.

    Antigua does not allow control or regulation by US authorities. Antigua want's to do business in the US, but ignore US law.
    Why is that so hard for you to understand?

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  28. Tom Lehrer said it by PPH · · Score: 5, Funny

    What do we do? We send the Marines!
    For might makes right,
    And till they've seen the light,
    They've got to be protected,
    All their rights respected,
    'Till somebody we like can be elected.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  29. Re:Who loves USA by Tagged_84 · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's AUSSIE!!! Aussie, Aussie, Aussie! :D We don't go around biting off bat heads you dingo!

  30. Re:Thanks, Antigua! by bl968 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The WTO Agreement is a treaty. This is what our constitution says about our treaty obligations. "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

    So a treaty obligation such adhering to WTO decisions has the equal weight to the Constitution of the United States.

    --
    "GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
  31. Re:Thanks, Antigua! by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The US Authorizes the sale of Cigarettes in the US too. Doesn't mean you can start mail ordering them over the internet.

    But with gambling, that's what is happening. The US tobacco companies can sell over the Internet, but the Antiguan ones cannot. That's an illegal violation of a treaty.

    Antigua does not allow control or regulation by US authorities. Antigua want's to do business in the US, but ignore US law.

    Why is that so hard for you to understand?

    So if Antigua decides to abolish copyright, but only ones held by US companies, why should the US complain what Antigua does in Antigua with Antiguan law?

  32. Re:Thanks, Antigua! by bl968 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually google provides a much better definition...

    notwithstanding /nätwiTHstandiNG/
    Preposition
    In spite of.

    So if we read the applicable term from the constitution,

    "and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding"

    This is what it would say written in modern English...

    "The Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and our International Treaty Obligations are the supreme law of the land. Judges are required to honor our treaty obligations; in spite of anything the Constitution or laws of any state may say to the contrary."

    --
    "GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
  33. Re:Who loves USA by Runaway1956 · · Score: 5, Informative

    You could try an experiment. Get yourself a few wheelbarrows of cash money. Go downtown, and start handing out money to passerby. Rinse and repeat daily for a few years.

    Come back one day, without your wheelbarrow, and see how many people are willing to buy your lunch for you.

    Love? Yeah, right. Propping up a puppet in Egypt has charmed the Egyptian people, hasn't it? Current events in Egypt today seem to show that US aid is a factor in their politics, but it isn't a ruling factor. And, what the US wants Egypt to do isn't a factor at all, seems to me.

    Some wise people have said that you can't buy love. If there is love for the US, I'd wager that it's found in our sister countries that were English colonies. Maybe France. Possibly some "like" in other nations, but not a lot of "love". Everyone, everywhere, loves our money, as long as it continues to flow. Even North Korea loves our money, and they'll take all that they can get, by whatever means that doesn't require them to bow down to our wishes. Ditto with Iran.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  34. Re:Who loves USA by guises · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because if there was a fight at the bar we all go to, we could be quite certain the Israelis and Brits would get beat up with us (and maybe even the Canadians and the Aussies). After that it gets pretty thin.

    I don't think a friend who doesn't want to get into a fight that you drunkenly started is any less of a friend, they're just tired of putting up with your crap.

    There are many more countries who would help us if our fight was remotely justified, France, Germany, etc. Compare the countries in Afghanistan to the countries in Iraq. Interestingly, Israel isn't on either list. I don't know why that is.

  35. Re:Thanks, Antigua! by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You seem to continue to side step the issue of the US having the right to control gambling within its borders.

    You seem to be ignorant of the fact that the US agreed to abide by certain rules for governing international trade. The US eagerly signed the WTO treaty, a binding contract between nations defining the rules of international trade. The US broke the terms of the contract in order to protect it's domestic gambling industry, this disadvantages all other signatories to the treaty who offer international gambling (including the UK and other staunch allies). Antigua is the only one with the balls to pursue the issue with the umpire. The fact that the WTO agreed with them indicates the WTO is now more than just a lapdog of the US state department.

    If the US regrets what it agreed to when it joined the WTO it can always do the honorable thing and pull out of the organisation (that it worked hard to establish). Instead they show themselves to be complete hypocrites by studiously ignoring adverse rulings and vigously enforcing benificial rulings.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  36. Re:Antigua is being taken for a ride. by rahvin112 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The US government can ban all travel by US citizens to Antigua. They can make it a criminal offense for an american citizen to spend money or provide money to the nation. They can bar all US financial groups from doing business with the island.

    Enacting any of these measures would immediately halt all US tourism in Antigua. This tourism is 90+% of the economy. I'm sure the WTO would allow Antigua to retaliate with equal sanctions to almost no effect to the US but the complete destruction of the Antiguan economy.

    They are playing with fire and anyone that suggests it's a good idea is a moron. But make no mistake, the lawyer that convinced them to take this path has already extracted his pound of flesh in the form of millions of dollars. In the end it will end just like the Sanford affair, an american will make off with millions of dollars of Antiguan money and the average Antigua citizen will suffer.

  37. Re:Thanks, Antigua! by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you can't keep a promise because it confilcts with the constitution then don't make the promise in the first place, or withdraw from the club and retain your honour. Cherry-picking the umpire's decisions is at best hypocritical, at worst it fucks up the game for all players.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  38. Re:Who loves USA by J+Story · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As a Canadian, I like the connection we have to Australia through being in the Commonwealth, and never saw why so many of you guys got bent out of shape over what is really just a figurehead...

    Agreed. As a fellow Canadian, I don't see the point in introducing a political element (in the form of elections) for a figurehead head of state. It seems to me that Canada, for one, has a value-for-money arrangement: Although the Governor General's office uses millions of dollars, for functionaries, upkeep of grounds, security, etc., the GG himself gets only a modest salary -- it was around $120,000 the last I recall. In addition, we get to have a monarch on the cheap: the UK provides housing, upkeep, perks, etc., while we only have to provide security (and room and board, I guess) when one of the family drops by on an official visit -- which is not often. For this comparatively small sum, Canada gets a hardworking, apolitical individual, backed by serious constitutional legal minds for those infrequent times when use of real power is called for (i.e. on the advice of the prime minister, deciding whether to prorogue parliament or call an election.)

    For similar reasons, Canada's judiciary is appointed, not elected: these guys are doing serious jobs which require them to be apolitical.

  39. Re:Who loves USA by ryzvonusef · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes we are!

    GIBE MOAR GREEN CARDS!

    Seriously, our hatred of the west ends immediately the moment an option for us to immigrate there becomes available. We are such hypocrites...

    --
    I am an ACCA student. Got a query on Accountancy/Finance? Maybe I can help!
  40. British support for US war lacking ! by SomethingOrOther · · Score: 5, Informative

    we could be quite certain the Israelis and Brits would get beat up with us

    You are joking right?
    You do realise that in 2001, 75% of the British public did not want to be part of the Afghan war.
    http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/154/26553.htm1

    That 1 Million people (1 in 60 of the population of the country) went to London to protest against the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/15_February_2003_anti-war_protest

    That parliament only voted for war because Tony Blair (subsequently one of the most vilified prime ministers in modern times) outright lied to parliament.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodgey_Dossier

    Sorry to bust your bubble.... but Britain & the rest of Europe isn't prepared to unilaterally support the US in war as you seem to believe. Thankfully, support for such wars is very much lacking by the majority of educated, intelligent Americans in your own country too.

    --
    Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
    Don't believe what you read is the truth.
  41. Re:Antigua is being taken for a ride. by Tom · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Always these purely theoretical "we can destroy them" delusions. *sigh*

    First of all, I don't know where you get the 90% figure from, a quick Google shows other numbers. Wikipedia has a detailed article putting the figure at around 60% GDP and 50% of the jobs. But those are very old numbers. But it's all tourism, not just US tourism.

    Second, the US is quick at hurting other nations, but not so quick at hurting potential voters. Quick, name three sanctions or other non-military attacks on foreign nations that the US has conducted in, say, the past 20 years that the voters have even noticed.

    Third, the US has already gambled away most of the good will it had accumulated in WW1, WW2 and the Cold War. Smashing down a tiny country would do a lot of reputation damage. Contrary to what rednecks believe and the public propaganda tells you, the US is extremely dependent on the rest of the world. Luckily, it goes both ways for most powerful nations on the globe, so there's no real danger of escalation, but if you insist on these "we could kill them" delusions, do keep in mind that if the rest of the world would ever band together and cut all trade to the US, you would have lights out within a month.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  42. Re:Antigua is being taken for a ride. by bentcd · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The US is already getting enough heat, both foreign and domestic, about their long-standing Cuban oblivion policy. It is not at all clear the administration wants to put political capital into the same sort of programme directed against Antigua. It might just be easier, in the end, to allow Antigua to run their gambling site. Or give them foreign aid to cover their losses from not doing so.

    If this is the sort of calculation Antigua has made, and they figure the odds are in their favour, then this is a fair bet to make. It will be interesting to see.

    (What is presumably not going to actually happen is the mp3 site, that's just a negotiating card to force the hand of the US.)

    --
    sigs are hazardous to your health