Play Online Poker  

Poker Legislation Post

 
Sign in | Join
in
Bodog
$100K Guaranteed
Every Sunday! 
Sign Up Today!
Rakeback
Get cash back after
playing poker!
Sign up now!
CarbonPoker 
$15,000 Rake Chase
Plus 30% Rakeback!
Cake Poker 
33% Rakeback
$25k extra each month!

Poker Legislation


Please help support pocketfives by using our links when choosing to download a new site!
CarbonPoker · Full Tilt · Cake Poker · PokerStars · Ultimate Bet · Players Only · Bodog

   

Judge freezes payments of online poker
kmil420 (United States) 1,856 Posts. Joined 11-28-2006.
06-09-2009 4:06 PM

24,000 Online Poker Players Affected by Federal Funds Seizure


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/APNewsBreak-Group-says-poker-apf-15481559.html?sec=topStories&pos=4&asset=&ccode=

APNewsBreak: Group says poker winnings are frozen

APNewsBreak: Group says government has frozen online poker players' winnings

WASHINGTON (AP) -- An advocacy group for online poker says the federal government has frozen the accounts of payment processors that handle the winnings of thousands of online poker players.

The Poker Players Alliance says those winnings are worth upward of $30 million.

The alliance tells The Associated Press that the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York told three banks to freeze the accounts.

A document obtained by the AP shows that a judge in the district issued a seizure warrant last week for an account at a Wells Fargo bank in San Francisco.

The Justice Department has long maintained that Internet gambling is illegal, a view that the poker group challenges.

 
 
 

D41M41B (United States) 325 Posts. Joined 09-21-2008.
06-18-2009 3:02 AM - In reply to

 solid, we have a strong team upfront fighting this battle for us and i'm happy to see this. keep the vids coming


TheEngineer (United States) 2,086 Posts. Joined 11-23-2007.
06-18-2009 7:21 AM - In reply to

One more thing....

Bill to study compulsive gaming introduced

We need to watch this one closely, as the recommendations could end up motivated not on how best to help those who develop excessive gaming habits, but by the politics of those who'd ban gaming for all adults.

-----------------------------------

Rep. Terry Leads Fight To Fund Gambling Addiction Research

http://it.quote.com/news/story.action?id=RTT906171108001129

(RTTNews) - Three congressmen - one Democrat and two Republicans - put forward a new bill this week aimed at fighting gambling addiction.

Representatives Lee Terry (R-NE), Jim Moran (D-VA) and Frank Wolf (R-VA) introduced the "Comprehensive Problem Gambling Act," which would use funds from he federal government for the research and treatment of gambling addiction.

"Gambling addiction can destroy families and communities," said Terry, who represents Nebraska's 2nd District, centered around Omaha.

He added, "Bankruptcy, divorce and crime are all devastating results of gambling addiction. For the first time ever this legislation would commit federal dollars to the research and treatment of gambling dependence.".......

 


tcb21 (United States) 291 Posts. Joined 07-07-2007.
06-18-2009 9:04 AM - In reply to

After watching Mr Pappas' interview and comparing it to Mr. Kathlein's (online poker players=alcoholics and child beaters) interview, it appears the the online poker community is in pretty good hands.


bigfatstub (United States) 1,228 Posts. Joined 03-03-2006.
06-18-2009 10:05 AM - In reply to

Congressman Erik Paulsen to me
show details Jun 16 (2 days ago) Reply


This is the letter I got back from my letter

Thank you for contacting my office to share your views and concerns.  It is an honor and a privilege to represent the people of Minnesota, and I want to be responsive to your needs and concerns.

Using the online form helps my office organize your communications to ensure that I am able to respond to your request in the most efficient and thorough manner possible.  Please consider this e-mail an acknowledgement that I have received your comments.

Sincerely,

Congressman Erik Paulsen
United States Congressman, Minnesota 3rd district

Please visit http://paulsen.congressnewsletter.net/mail/util.cfm?mailaction=profile to sign up for Email Updates:

 Reply Forward


stevem1267 (United States) 3,374 Posts. Joined 06-09-2007.
06-18-2009 2:41 PM - In reply to

tcb21: 

After watching Mr Pappas' interview and comparing it to Mr. Kathlein's (online poker players=alcoholics and child beaters) interview, it appears the the online poker community is in pretty good hands.



exactly. at least we have people fighting for us rather than just the forums.

i got a 4k wire today in pending transactions for my bank. clear 1 time!!!

K1d_Gr1nD (United States) 1,039 Posts. Joined 03-18-2007.
06-18-2009 10:40 PM - In reply to

D41M41B: 
K1d_Gr1nD: 
RollTideRoll: 

I am looking to do a bank wire on my next cashout.  

Can anyone can tell me what is a Bank Swift - BIC?  Its on the bank wire application on PS. 

Thx in advance.  RTR



guys DO NOT post specific info about what the are doing to combat this shit!!!!!...dont make it any easier for teh feds...your are kidding yourself if you dont think they are reading these posts...

MODS, DELETE ALL SPECIFIC INFO THAT THE FEDS COULD USE...IMMED!!!!


lol you are an idiot trying to be superman. nothing in that post at ALL is anything the feds do not know or can't find out by looking at the cashout options on pokerstars website. its basic knowledge any international bank transfer requres a swift code.. so thanks, but no thanks.


no need in calling names...your a kid who obv doesnt fully understand everything...wow....just wow

D41M41B (United States) 325 Posts. Joined 09-21-2008.
06-19-2009 3:11 AM - In reply to

 

lolol. calling me a kid when his name specifically has KID in it. all im saying it stop overreacting as his post had nothing harmful at all in it. so again, thanks. but no thanks.

MadTiger (United States) 6,243 Posts. Joined 02-10-2006.
06-19-2009 6:38 AM - In reply to

lance0623: 

My credit union (Navy Federal) doesn't have a SWIFT code - is it needed for them to do a wire transfer to me?



YES! I had to put my credit union on the bench in favor of US Bank.

TheEngineer (United States) 2,086 Posts. Joined 11-23-2007.
06-20-2009 10:16 PM - In reply to

Patrick "Skallagrim" Fleming, PPA's Litigation Support Director, has kindly taken the time to put together some information for us regarding various federal legal issues.  Please check it out:


 
Click here to Twitter

Skallagrim: 

 Hello fellow poker players. This is the PPA's Litigation Support Director "Skallagrim" and I am posting this at the request of TheEngineer.

The recent seizure of funds by the US government and the resulting disruption in echecks and paper checks has a lot of poker players rightly concerned; they want to know: is it a violation of Federal Law for me to play online poker, to cash out,  and/or to deposit?

I will try and make sense of these question in this post. Unfortunately, virtually all of the law in this area is open to debate. So until the courts make actual decisions on these issues, nothing is completely for certain.

Lets start with the big question: Is playing online poker illegal under Federal law?

The answer to that question is the only one that is pretty straight forward: there is a general legal consensus that even the DOJ agrees with that merely participating in a poker game online does not subject a US resident to a federal prosecution, In other words, THERE IS NO FEDERAL LAW MAKING PLAYING ONLINE POKER A CRIMINAL OFFENSE.

- Please note, State laws are an entirely different matter and will be the subject of a later post -

The reason I can say the above with some certainty is that there are only 4 Federal laws that affect "gambling" and thus arguably poker. They are the recently passed Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA), and the older Wire Act (WA), the Illegal Gambling Business Act (IGBA), and the Travel Act (TA). ALL OF THESE FEDERAL LAWS TARGET THE BUSINESS PROVIDING THE GAMBLING, NOT THE PLAYERS PARTICIPATING IN THE GAME.

I must note that is is also arguable that none of these four acts apply to online  poker at all, for either the player or the site (that again is for another post), but I want to concentrate this post on player's money, not on money held by the sites.

The UIGEA is, of course, the act most people have heard of. It was passed in Oct. 2006 and shortly thereafter a number of large online poker sites left the US market. THE UIGEA, HOWEVER, DID NOT MAKE ONLINE POKER  ILLEGAL. The UIGEA expressly states in the law that it was not making any game illegal that wasn't already illegal, nor was it making any illegal game legal. So despite those sites that left the US, either they had already broken US law by running a poker site before the UIGEA passed, or they were not breaking the law and the UIGEA does not apply to them. As you well know, some sites believed they were not breaking the law and continued to offer poker to US residents.

The evil of the UIGEA, as it affects your money, is found in the provisions that relate to banks. These provisions also do not "make" poker transactions illegal; they either already were or they already were not. But the provisions encourage the banks to block any transaction that might be related to "illegal online gambling." If they block a transaction that has anything to do with any game on the internet (including as was recently publicized, credit card purchases of State Lottery tickets!) they cannot get in trouble. If they knowingly allow a gambling transaction, however, they get in big trouble. Obviously if you run a bank its far easier to just not handle any transaction that's related to gambling than to try and figure out which ones are legal ones and which ones are illegal ones. But at least when a bank declines your transaction, they don't take your money. At worst they will hold it for a time while investigating, then return it to you and maybe close your account.

And one last point, the UIGEA, if it applies to poker at all, only applies to deposits to sites, it says nothing about player withdrawals from sites. It even says this in the regulations. But you try telling that to your bank's manager.

Taking your money for keeps can only be done by the government. They can seize money while investigating if they have "probable cause" to believe its "illegal proceeds." That's what they have done so far in the recent case. But they can only make it theirs for good by starting a legal Forfeiture action and proving in court by "a preponderance of the evidence" that the money is "illegal proceeds." This has not happened ... yet.

"Illegal proceeds" thus becomes the key. But generally speaking, illegal proceeds in the gambling context must be proceeds of the gambling business, not winnings or other money returned to the players.

Of course, its hard to prove whose money it is when its solely in the hands of the gambling business. So, for example, if you bet $50 with an online sports book on the Giants to win, and the Feds bust that book before the game and seize that money - the Feds are not going to give it back to you if the bet money is actually in the hands of the bookie.

But that's not the same as when that same sports book sends you back $75 because the game happened and in fact the Giants did win. At some point that becomes your money. And under Federal law your money (so long as you are not a "gambling business" like being another bookie) is not "proceeds." Again ignoring state law issues, and using sports betting as an example because it is clearly illegal under federal law, even your illegal gambling winnings are NOT illegal gambling business proceeds, and so not subject to Federal Forfeiture.

And that's the irony of what is currently going on. It is painfully obvious reading all the posts about the players who have had checks bounce and incurred overdraft fees or couldn't pay other bills, that the recent action by the Federal Government directly affected you players! It cost you your money! It was certainly not site proceeds.

And while the sites have for the most part taken it upon themselves to restore lost funds in players' accounts, that was probably not something they were legally required to do. For example, when you get a paycheck and someone steals it from you and cashes it before you can stop payment on it, you don't get a new paycheck (unless you have a very generous employer). Usually you are the one out the money. What the government did to poker players isn't exactly the same, of course, but the general principle still applies IMHO.

And that's why this action by our government has to be the last such action; we must stop this if we can, one way or another. This case will really set the standard for the future. If the Government can get away with this one, your poker money is not safe. If poker money isn't safe, who will play?

So, I say it is time to FIGHT. For us lawyers, we are preparing to go to court. For the rest of you, DO EVERYTHING YOU CAN!  Join the PPA, write letters, call your congressperson, and let your friends know so they can join the fight too.

As for specific help fighting for your rights to your money, for that information I will turn things over to my friend and fellow PPA member, TheEngineer.

Thanks for your time reading this,

Skallagrim




JPFisher55 (United States) 26 Posts. Joined 12-02-2007.
07-01-2009 10:40 AM - In reply to

 G911 has an interesting update on the SDNY DOJ seizure. http://www.gambling911.com/gambling-news/team-full-tilt-worries-over-poker-echeck-seizures-070109.html

Of course, anything in the G911 must be taken with a grain of salt.  Still, it appears that the DOJ is not backing down since it has not unsealed the court documents behind this seizure.  So I have a question for Skall and TE.

Has the PPA planned for potential DOJ action (subpoena to testify before a grand jury or, much less likely, filing of criminal information or indictment) against poker pros who represent FTP or PS or against principles of FTP or its software provider? 




Skallagrim (United States) 63 Posts. Joined 05-01-2007.
07-01-2009 5:00 PM - In reply to

JPFisher55: 

 G911 has an interesting update on the SDNY DOJ seizure. http://www.gambling911.com/gambling-news/team-full-tilt-worries-over-poker-echeck-seizures-070109.html

Of course, anything in the G911 must be taken with a grain of salt.  Still, it appears that the DOJ is not backing down since it has not unsealed the court documents behind this seizure.  So I have a question for Skall and TE.

Has the PPA planned for potential DOJ action (subpoena to testify before a grand jury or, much less likely, filing of criminal information or indictment) against poker pros who represent FTP or PS or against principles of FTP or its software provider? 





This article, IMHO, like so much of what g911 writes, needs to be taken with much more than a grain of salt. A truckload would seem about right.

I do think that if the DOJ were planning on arresting any person they would do that first and seize the money second - thats how they usually do it anyway. Its much easier for the person to get away after the money is seized than it is for the person to hide the money after they have been arrested.

As for the FTP pros, they don't need the PPA's lawyers; they already have some of the best lawyers in the country in their corner.

Skallagrim

TheEngineer (United States) 2,086 Posts. Joined 11-23-2007.
07-01-2009 8:35 PM - In reply to

Skallagrim: 
JPFisher55: 

 G911 has an interesting update on the SDNY DOJ seizure. http://www.gambling911.com/gambling-news/team-full-tilt-worries-over-poker-echeck-seizures-070109.html

Of course, anything in the G911 must be taken with a grain of salt.  Still, it appears that the DOJ is not backing down since it has not unsealed the court documents behind this seizure.  So I have a question for Skall and TE.

Has the PPA planned for potential DOJ action (subpoena to testify before a grand jury or, much less likely, filing of criminal information or indictment) against poker pros who represent FTP or PS or against principles of FTP or its software provider? 





This article, IMHO, like so much of what g911 writes, needs to be taken with much more than a grain of salt. A truckload would seem about right.

I do think that if the DOJ were planning on arresting any person they would do that first and seize the money second - thats how they usually do it anyway. Its much easier for the person to get away after the money is seized than it is for the person to hide the money after they have been arrested.

As for the FTP pros, they don't need the PPA's lawyers; they already have some of the best lawyers in the country in their corner.

Skallagrim


Agree 100%
 
Return to Top
Page 42 of 42 (627 items) « First ... < Previous 38 39 40 41 42


P5's Member Blogs
Free Poker Coaching (I Ne...
By Cre8ive - added Nov 18 2009, 02:38 AM
Relationships and Poker
By dtools22 - added Nov 16 2009, 12:15 PM
A Victory and Playing wit...
By sgildea25 - added Nov 16 2009, 12:49 PM
 
Joe Cada is our guest this week!  The newest WSOP Main Event Champion answers questions from P5s viewers.

P5s Podcast, Nov 19, 2009
Thur, 19 Nov 2009 12:00:00 EST
Jon 'apestyles' Van Fleet is back on the podcast this week to talk about the latest in his poker career.

P5s Podcast, Nov 12, 2009
Thur, 12 Nov 2009 12:00:00 EST
PocketFives.com Rankings
Rank PLB PRO
1. gboro780 3 1
2. djk123 1 3
3. Jovial Gent 2 4
4. moorman1 8 2
5. Doc Sands 5 6
6. rock3656 6 8
7. govshark2 7 7
8. ImaLuckSac 11 9
9. badpab2 4 19
10. brainwash 10 16
Carbon Poker Sorting Tables
Rank PLB
 1. djk123 9022.06
 2. Jovial Gent 8103.48
 3. gboro780 8046.07
 4. rock3656 7746.87
 5. govshark2 7645.73
 6. brainwash 7528.39
 7. 1SickDisease 7466.88
 8. ImaLuckSac 7369.79
 9. hoodini10 7327.57
 10. HITTHEPANDA 7271.41
Go