Interesting point about Gold Medal and how they forced them to keep it open, I didn't know that was the final outcome.
Like I said though, this is stirring things up hoping people go away. It won't stop the industry, not in the least bit. Maybe it will slow down the ads and such, but I would argue that would be a positive on the whole. NASA and Carruthers just don't get it. He likes to flaunt stuff in the face of everyone but he just makes it that much more likely that undue attention comes on the industry. There are a lot of insiders both in the lobby side and the actual operators that are going nuts over his behavior, especially how he goes about spending money on press releases which go along the tone of "ha ha ha, I took in $30 million in wagers and you are not going to catch me". Moron I tell you. Its all ego on his part, most in CR will tell you egos don't come much bigger than his. If you are making a lot of money why would you feel the need to flaunt it? Do it quietly with very specific advertising and you are fine. Between them and BoDog with their tours to actual sites where games are played with their can't miss it bus, there are some that are acting like they are preparing us all for the fall of the Roman Empire all over again. Greed isn't enough to some, some have taken it personal and want for their egotistical reasons to feel they have complete victory by rubbing some faces in it. Bad strategy, but these are loose cannons and since bookmakers don't act with any kind of cohesive strategy here what else could happen?
Like I said though, this is stirring things up hoping people go away. It won't stop the industry, not in the least bit. Maybe it will slow down the ads and such, but I would argue that would be a positive on the whole. NASA and Carruthers just don't get it. He likes to flaunt stuff in the face of everyone but he just makes it that much more likely that undue attention comes on the industry. There are a lot of insiders both in the lobby side and the actual operators that are going nuts over his behavior, especially how he goes about spending money on press releases which go along the tone of "ha ha ha, I took in $30 million in wagers and you are not going to catch me". Moron I tell you. Its all ego on his part, most in CR will tell you egos don't come much bigger than his. If you are making a lot of money why would you feel the need to flaunt it? Do it quietly with very specific advertising and you are fine. Between them and BoDog with their tours to actual sites where games are played with their can't miss it bus, there are some that are acting like they are preparing us all for the fall of the Roman Empire all over again. Greed isn't enough to some, some have taken it personal and want for their egotistical reasons to feel they have complete victory by rubbing some faces in it. Bad strategy, but these are loose cannons and since bookmakers don't act with any kind of cohesive strategy here what else could happen?
I just moved on Lou. I don't agree with the man's opinion, but that is just an opinion and you played it safe. Yes I would agree taking a percentage could be construed and prosecuted as bookmaking, but the mere placing of ads isn't and I am certain of that.
It doesn't matter what business we are talking about, as long as its a legal business in the place its located there just isn't a way you can make the mere placement of ads illegal. Especially the nature of the ads you see. An advertiser makes the comment that we operate a book and invite the person to call or read more on your website, the person never just calls in and starts betting. That isn't a legally binding act, someone gets to the website and is supposed to read over what the business offers and make a judgement for himself as to if they would like to do business and if the business is indeed legal or not in their jurisdiction. And as I have stressed time and again there is no federal law against BETTING offshore and in probably half the states, maybe more, there are not real specific laws that make it a crime either. Officials of states and the Feds love to make comments about this being legal or that being legal, but its all unsupported most of the time. Its up to a court to make that judgement, but if you say "in my opinion" you can start a lot of crap and never be held accountable for it.
It doesn't matter what business we are talking about, as long as its a legal business in the place its located there just isn't a way you can make the mere placement of ads illegal. Especially the nature of the ads you see. An advertiser makes the comment that we operate a book and invite the person to call or read more on your website, the person never just calls in and starts betting. That isn't a legally binding act, someone gets to the website and is supposed to read over what the business offers and make a judgement for himself as to if they would like to do business and if the business is indeed legal or not in their jurisdiction. And as I have stressed time and again there is no federal law against BETTING offshore and in probably half the states, maybe more, there are not real specific laws that make it a crime either. Officials of states and the Feds love to make comments about this being legal or that being legal, but its all unsupported most of the time. Its up to a court to make that judgement, but if you say "in my opinion" you can start a lot of crap and never be held accountable for it.
Bill,
Why do you keep bringing up websites? Print, wire and %'s. For someone that is so sure of himself, as you are. I find it amusing that you haven't taken me up on my offer to have you contact the attorney directly and come back with the results. I guess I now see can see why you want *move on*.
Why do you keep bringing up websites? Print, wire and %'s. For someone that is so sure of himself, as you are. I find it amusing that you haven't taken me up on my offer to have you contact the attorney directly and come back with the results. I guess I now see can see why you want *move on*.
I am talking about print ads Lou, I was looking at one when I posted that last night. Wire ads? Don't think too many of those are out there. Percentage seems the province of the touts and hell they could get them on a number of other charges anyways. Any ad Lou, any, is undoubtedly legal as long as a legal and licensed operation is behind it. I want proof that this is not true.
If you think this lawyer will even talk to me without me giving him a dime then send me some contact information and what your particular investigation covered. fadethedog@hotmail.com
If you think this lawyer will even talk to me without me giving him a dime then send me some contact information and what your particular investigation covered. fadethedog@hotmail.com
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WildBill:
I am talking about print ads Lou, I was looking at one when I posted that last night.
You're wrong.
"Wire ads? Don't think too many of those are out there."
Tv. Why don't any of these major books have tv ads? Because the books don't want to, or because tv won't let them?
"Percentage seems the province of the touts and hell they could get them on a number of other charges anyways."
The books offer it all day long. Agents take it all day long. Many have their own websites.
"Any ad Lou, any, is undoubtedly legal as long as a legal and licensed operation is behind it."
Wrong. Look at the drug scenario. I don't know why you ignored that (other than it made sense).
"I want proof that this is not true."
That's what lawyers are for. I paid for advice and got it. I was trying to help out by paiing along professional advice that I paid for.
"If you think this lawyer will even talk to me without me giving him a dime then send me some contact information and what your particular investigation covered. fadethedog@hotmail.com<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I guess you and your lobbiests don't want proof as bad as you act.
I am talking about print ads Lou, I was looking at one when I posted that last night.
You're wrong.
"Wire ads? Don't think too many of those are out there."
Tv. Why don't any of these major books have tv ads? Because the books don't want to, or because tv won't let them?
"Percentage seems the province of the touts and hell they could get them on a number of other charges anyways."
The books offer it all day long. Agents take it all day long. Many have their own websites.
"Any ad Lou, any, is undoubtedly legal as long as a legal and licensed operation is behind it."
Wrong. Look at the drug scenario. I don't know why you ignored that (other than it made sense).
"I want proof that this is not true."
That's what lawyers are for. I paid for advice and got it. I was trying to help out by paiing along professional advice that I paid for.
"If you think this lawyer will even talk to me without me giving him a dime then send me some contact information and what your particular investigation covered. fadethedog@hotmail.com<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I guess you and your lobbiests don't want proof as bad as you act.
TV contract precludes any advertising on a national basis by any gambling entity. Local ads can be for casinos, but the national time you speak of is under strict limitations subject to the approval of the NFL.
Guess you must be new or something Lester, didn't you hear of the big stink about Las Vegas getting denied for its non-gaming ad??? Just seems strange you are making conclusions without knowing about that subject which was national news and all over the RX at the time.
Sending money with a transfer service and advertising are a world of difference. I don't get it, why must you and Lou come out here and try to make this argument? What is it to Lou is what I want to know, this certainly isn't the first time he has come here trying to convince us all we are going to the slammer for betting offshore and that all these businesses are about to get busted by the FBI. Why post crap like that here? If Lou was ever proven right, what good will it be to gloat about the fact that he posted here? I don't know, but I guess I am getting tired of arguing this, put simply there are no federal laws against betting and certainly nothing illegal about advertising the services. If the Feds want to rustle crap up and scare people, well its hard to stop them. However notice how 95% of their activity is of investigatory nature, they aren't dumb enough to go to court most of the time because they stand a good chance of losing and getting slapped on the wrists rather hard for their questionable methods. Ok, I have said enough, have fun with the rest of this discussion.
Guess you must be new or something Lester, didn't you hear of the big stink about Las Vegas getting denied for its non-gaming ad??? Just seems strange you are making conclusions without knowing about that subject which was national news and all over the RX at the time.
Sending money with a transfer service and advertising are a world of difference. I don't get it, why must you and Lou come out here and try to make this argument? What is it to Lou is what I want to know, this certainly isn't the first time he has come here trying to convince us all we are going to the slammer for betting offshore and that all these businesses are about to get busted by the FBI. Why post crap like that here? If Lou was ever proven right, what good will it be to gloat about the fact that he posted here? I don't know, but I guess I am getting tired of arguing this, put simply there are no federal laws against betting and certainly nothing illegal about advertising the services. If the Feds want to rustle crap up and scare people, well its hard to stop them. However notice how 95% of their activity is of investigatory nature, they aren't dumb enough to go to court most of the time because they stand a good chance of losing and getting slapped on the wrists rather hard for their questionable methods. Ok, I have said enough, have fun with the rest of this discussion.
Ok Lou, where is heroin LEGAL??? Even in places where they are very tolerant of it, its still not legal. Amsterdam has laws against drugs, they just chose to take out the penalty side of it as long as people stick to certain controlled areas. Drugs aren't legal anywhere Lou. If they were and you could find a radio station or magazine that would accept an ad for them (highly unlikely due to the massive protest/boycott they would get), I think they could advertise. It would still be illegal to possess them in this country so they could say "come to XXX, where you can do coke while you have a Coke"
It's illegal, but has no penalty???? Are you kidding me?
With Drugs, the product is the drug.
With Gambling the product is the money.
As soon as you that illegal product comes to the states, you violated the US law.
Btw, NFL isn't the only tv out there Bill. Why aren't books advertising on TV?
I'm really wondering why people have put you so high up with your comments. It's clearly obvious you just spout off legal advice without ANY professional reasoning and no desire for professional support. Which could very easily put readers at risk. Shrink, you 'could' be responsible for putting people in danger with this guy on your payroll. you may want to look into this yourself.
With Drugs, the product is the drug.
With Gambling the product is the money.
As soon as you that illegal product comes to the states, you violated the US law.
Btw, NFL isn't the only tv out there Bill. Why aren't books advertising on TV?
I'm really wondering why people have put you so high up with your comments. It's clearly obvious you just spout off legal advice without ANY professional reasoning and no desire for professional support. Which could very easily put readers at risk. Shrink, you 'could' be responsible for putting people in danger with this guy on your payroll. you may want to look into this yourself.
Yes he should put people like you with a history of fear-*****ring and innuedo on the payroll, yeah right. What facts have I given that have been wrong? What do I say that is so lacking in reasoning? And why haven't you bothered to send me the info for this lawyer of yours after I put my email address up? I was more than willing to talk to this guy and see what he says. I will report what he says and if he makes arguments that somehow are justifiable despite the fact that there are no laws against this then I will post those or write an article about them.
Lou and for the others out there, what I post about the Kyl law and what the legal status of this form of gaming are purely that given to me by people with more expertise and information than I have. I have heard the legal status of internet gaming as we speak and I have also heard some theories on how a court and jury would interpret these things. I am not a lawyer nor do I represent myself to be one, I am just repeating the positions taken by some lawyers that have worked on gaming cases before.
I state these things because I believe in letting people make their own decisions on this. If some business or person is afraid of the risks involved then I say by all means steer clear of this. What I don't do is spread falsehoods and people that come on here and make blanket statements saying playing offshore is illegal end of discussion are wrong, plain and simple. My argument is based on the law itself. Lou, your argument is based on what an attorney told you and what he believed could happen. If you want to follow his advice and avoid trouble, then by all means do so and tell us that. What you have done, though, is tried to imply a law out of something that is merely an opinion. Its not legally true and the Shrink is right, advertising is not illegal. If Ken was receiving a percentage of books income, yes that would be illegal, but to merely give them a place to advertise their services is not.
Doesn't a Supreme Court decision that directly addressed this issue of a legal gaming company advertising to another jursidiction where it wasn't legal mean enough? I mean its pretty clear cut, the court could change their minds in the future, but for now what they said is case law and almost every judge in the country will follow their interpretation. A gaming company that is legally operating in its locations (meaning it isn't operating a sales office or other significant operation in the US or a jurisdiction where its illegal) is free to advertise its product anywhere it chooses. Now if that activity is undertaken in an illegal manner is something that the books and the player solely are responsible for. The courts would clearly say a player in Dallas that sees an ad for Horseshoe in Shreveport can't use that ad as a justification for betting in an underground casino in Dallas. Its the same theory here, the player has to make a judgement as to if his activity is legal and the books are held accountable for the same. The player cannot go and say "hey I heard an ad for it so I assumed it was legal from my house and I blame the place that ran the ad for it". It just won't work.
As for TV ads, they do exist but not during games. TV and radio stations don't have limits on what they can offer for ads, but if that violates the terms of their contract or pisses off the product they are airing they could lose that business. As I said, even if drugs were expressly legal in another country, can you imagine the backlash if a station showed ads for them? There is no big backlash against gaming, some congresspeople would like you to believe it but its just not true. Few people care if its advertised or not. For this reason stations can show it and I have seen TV stations show these ads in conjunction with the shows of sports touts. Just don't expect it to be on an NFL or NCAA broadcast because those organizations would quickly void their contract for breach of contract. The law allows for these ads, but it also doesn't guarantee that they can put them on whenever and wherever they choose.
Lou and for the others out there, what I post about the Kyl law and what the legal status of this form of gaming are purely that given to me by people with more expertise and information than I have. I have heard the legal status of internet gaming as we speak and I have also heard some theories on how a court and jury would interpret these things. I am not a lawyer nor do I represent myself to be one, I am just repeating the positions taken by some lawyers that have worked on gaming cases before.
I state these things because I believe in letting people make their own decisions on this. If some business or person is afraid of the risks involved then I say by all means steer clear of this. What I don't do is spread falsehoods and people that come on here and make blanket statements saying playing offshore is illegal end of discussion are wrong, plain and simple. My argument is based on the law itself. Lou, your argument is based on what an attorney told you and what he believed could happen. If you want to follow his advice and avoid trouble, then by all means do so and tell us that. What you have done, though, is tried to imply a law out of something that is merely an opinion. Its not legally true and the Shrink is right, advertising is not illegal. If Ken was receiving a percentage of books income, yes that would be illegal, but to merely give them a place to advertise their services is not.
Doesn't a Supreme Court decision that directly addressed this issue of a legal gaming company advertising to another jursidiction where it wasn't legal mean enough? I mean its pretty clear cut, the court could change their minds in the future, but for now what they said is case law and almost every judge in the country will follow their interpretation. A gaming company that is legally operating in its locations (meaning it isn't operating a sales office or other significant operation in the US or a jurisdiction where its illegal) is free to advertise its product anywhere it chooses. Now if that activity is undertaken in an illegal manner is something that the books and the player solely are responsible for. The courts would clearly say a player in Dallas that sees an ad for Horseshoe in Shreveport can't use that ad as a justification for betting in an underground casino in Dallas. Its the same theory here, the player has to make a judgement as to if his activity is legal and the books are held accountable for the same. The player cannot go and say "hey I heard an ad for it so I assumed it was legal from my house and I blame the place that ran the ad for it". It just won't work.
As for TV ads, they do exist but not during games. TV and radio stations don't have limits on what they can offer for ads, but if that violates the terms of their contract or pisses off the product they are airing they could lose that business. As I said, even if drugs were expressly legal in another country, can you imagine the backlash if a station showed ads for them? There is no big backlash against gaming, some congresspeople would like you to believe it but its just not true. Few people care if its advertised or not. For this reason stations can show it and I have seen TV stations show these ads in conjunction with the shows of sports touts. Just don't expect it to be on an NFL or NCAA broadcast because those organizations would quickly void their contract for breach of contract. The law allows for these ads, but it also doesn't guarantee that they can put them on whenever and wherever they choose.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> If Ken was receiving a percentage of books income, yes that would be illegal, but to merely give them a place to advertise their services is not.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Correct on the %. Ads via the net are ok.
you have e-mail.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Correct on the %. Ads via the net are ok.
you have e-mail.
