Do you happen to know the Case number and state its involved? I think this would be a great time for everyone that is advertising involved help support this guy as It makes a huge decision if we have to close doors or not.
Entertainment purposes and News information only isn't good enough? OH NO
:smoker2:
The case has been filed by a gaming portal against the DoJ. You can see they brought their case in the 5th Circuit where there is already a favorable decision in the previously mentioned case. There's lots of other links off of this one. Here is the link:
http://online.casinocity.com/firstamendment/
BATON ROUGE, Lousiana, August 9, 2004 - Casino City, Inc. today filed a complaint against the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment that advertising online casinos and sportsbooks is constitutionally protected commercial free speech under the First Amendment of the United States.
In June of 2003 the Department of Justice sent letters to a variety of organizations including the National Association of Broadcasters, the Magazine Publishers of America, the Independent Press Association, and the National Newspaper Association. The letters requested that the organizations warn their members that individuals accepting such advertisements might face prosecution.
Several months later the Justice Department issued subpoenas to a variety of media outlets, Internet portals, public relations firms, and other companies seeking detailed information on the purchase and placement of online casino and sportsbook advertisements.
The actions of the Department of Justice have been widely reported in the news and have had a chilling effect upon free speech. Popular Internet portals including Google and Yahoo have recently ceased accepting advertising for online casinos and sportsbooks. Many individuals in the online gambling industry view the actions of the DOJ as a form of blackmail based on the belief of a few government officials rather than established legal principles.
There have been factions within the government that have tried unsuccessfully to explicitly outlaw online gaming by citizens for years. In early 2000, Michael Corfman, President and CEO of Casino City, wrote to his congressman, Barney Frank to ask his opinion of prohibiting online gaming. Barney Frank responded "…I would have hoped that the American experience with alcohol in the '20s and '30s would have made my colleagues far more skeptical of new forms of prohibition than they have been. I agree with you that this legislation violates the principle of leaving the Internet unregulated, and violates as well the privacy of millions of Americans. While I do not myself gamble, I think it is a choice that adults should be able to make for themselves, and I do not support restrictions of this sort, especially when it involves a very intrusive form of regulation of the Internet…"
Casino City's parent corporation has been involved in the gaming industry for years. It created the original gaming portal site, CasinoCity.com in 1995. Today the Casino City website is operated by Casino City, Inc., and is now the most popular such site on the web covering online casinos and sportsbooks, land-based casinos, gaming strategy, and news. It is part of a network of websites including Online.CasinoCity.com devoted to online gaming, and www.CasinoCityTimes.com covering gaming news and offering visitors thousands of articles on gaming strategy.
When the Casino City website was first launched, there were no online casinos, and online advertising was virtually nonexistent. Today, however, I-gaming advertisements form an important part of Casino City's revenue. Company CEO, Michael Corfman, says "The public has the right to see the wealth of information we provide on casinos and sportsbooks, and we have the First Amendment right to advertise online gaming on the web to support its free publication."
The actions of the department of Justice have definitely had an impact on Casino City notes Corfman. "Our parent corporation had partnership plans with A&E Television Networks to promote the Breaking Vegas documentary and associated sweepstakes. Casino City was to be featured on The History Channel website and in 30 national television spots, but they cancelled the agreement after the promotion had already begun. We were told by their marketing agents that A&E felt there was an unacceptable risk the network would be viewed as aiding and abetting online gaming since it's only two clicks from our home page to an online gaming site. When you have an FCC license that must be protected to stay in business, you just can't afford to take chances with the Department of Justice…More recently, a major Las Vegas casino wanted to work with our parent corporation on a promotion but their lawyers nixed the arrangement because of our involvement with online gaming."
Casino City believes the actions taken by the Department of Justice are wrong, and that they threaten our freedom of speech in violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. We also believe that matters of law such as this are properly decided by the courts, and not by government administrators interpreting laws in a way that many experts claim is flawed. Consequently, we have today asked the courts to determine our rights, and those of others similarly situated, under the United States Constitution.
http://online.casinocity.com/firstamendment/
BATON ROUGE, Lousiana, August 9, 2004 - Casino City, Inc. today filed a complaint against the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana. The complaint seeks a declaratory judgment that advertising online casinos and sportsbooks is constitutionally protected commercial free speech under the First Amendment of the United States.
In June of 2003 the Department of Justice sent letters to a variety of organizations including the National Association of Broadcasters, the Magazine Publishers of America, the Independent Press Association, and the National Newspaper Association. The letters requested that the organizations warn their members that individuals accepting such advertisements might face prosecution.
Several months later the Justice Department issued subpoenas to a variety of media outlets, Internet portals, public relations firms, and other companies seeking detailed information on the purchase and placement of online casino and sportsbook advertisements.
The actions of the Department of Justice have been widely reported in the news and have had a chilling effect upon free speech. Popular Internet portals including Google and Yahoo have recently ceased accepting advertising for online casinos and sportsbooks. Many individuals in the online gambling industry view the actions of the DOJ as a form of blackmail based on the belief of a few government officials rather than established legal principles.
There have been factions within the government that have tried unsuccessfully to explicitly outlaw online gaming by citizens for years. In early 2000, Michael Corfman, President and CEO of Casino City, wrote to his congressman, Barney Frank to ask his opinion of prohibiting online gaming. Barney Frank responded "…I would have hoped that the American experience with alcohol in the '20s and '30s would have made my colleagues far more skeptical of new forms of prohibition than they have been. I agree with you that this legislation violates the principle of leaving the Internet unregulated, and violates as well the privacy of millions of Americans. While I do not myself gamble, I think it is a choice that adults should be able to make for themselves, and I do not support restrictions of this sort, especially when it involves a very intrusive form of regulation of the Internet…"
Casino City's parent corporation has been involved in the gaming industry for years. It created the original gaming portal site, CasinoCity.com in 1995. Today the Casino City website is operated by Casino City, Inc., and is now the most popular such site on the web covering online casinos and sportsbooks, land-based casinos, gaming strategy, and news. It is part of a network of websites including Online.CasinoCity.com devoted to online gaming, and www.CasinoCityTimes.com covering gaming news and offering visitors thousands of articles on gaming strategy.
When the Casino City website was first launched, there were no online casinos, and online advertising was virtually nonexistent. Today, however, I-gaming advertisements form an important part of Casino City's revenue. Company CEO, Michael Corfman, says "The public has the right to see the wealth of information we provide on casinos and sportsbooks, and we have the First Amendment right to advertise online gaming on the web to support its free publication."
The actions of the department of Justice have definitely had an impact on Casino City notes Corfman. "Our parent corporation had partnership plans with A&E Television Networks to promote the Breaking Vegas documentary and associated sweepstakes. Casino City was to be featured on The History Channel website and in 30 national television spots, but they cancelled the agreement after the promotion had already begun. We were told by their marketing agents that A&E felt there was an unacceptable risk the network would be viewed as aiding and abetting online gaming since it's only two clicks from our home page to an online gaming site. When you have an FCC license that must be protected to stay in business, you just can't afford to take chances with the Department of Justice…More recently, a major Las Vegas casino wanted to work with our parent corporation on a promotion but their lawyers nixed the arrangement because of our involvement with online gaming."
Casino City believes the actions taken by the Department of Justice are wrong, and that they threaten our freedom of speech in violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. We also believe that matters of law such as this are properly decided by the courts, and not by government administrators interpreting laws in a way that many experts claim is flawed. Consequently, we have today asked the courts to determine our rights, and those of others similarly situated, under the United States Constitution.
They brought the case in federal court.
http://online.casinocity.com/firstamendment/action.cfm
*UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 04-557-B-M3
SECTION
Chief Judge Frank J. Polozola
Magistrate Docia Dalby
CASINO CITY, INC.
VERSUS
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE
COMPLAINT
*****Plaintiff, Casino City, Inc., complains of defendant, United States Department of Justice, as follows:
This Court has original jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1331, as this action involves a federal question.
Venue properly rests with this Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1391(e), as the Defendant is an agency of the United States and the Plaintiff resides in this judicial district.
PARTIES
The Plaintiff Casino City, Inc., (hereinafter "Casino City"), is a for profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Louisiana.
Casino City operates the Casino City Network, a collection of portal sites, including CasinoCity.com and http://Online.CasinoCity.com, which disseminate information about land based and online casinos, casino style games and sports betting.
The Defendant is the United States Department of Justice, (hereinafter "DOJ"), an agency of the United States.
NATURE OF ACTION
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sections 2201 and 2202, Casino City seeks a declaration as to its constitutional rights to engage in lawful commercial speech.
FACTS
The DOJ has conducted and continues to conduct an active investigation into United States businesses that sell and place advertisements for legal overseas online casino and sports book companies.
In June 2003 the DOJ sent a letter to the National Association of Broadcasters ("NAB Letter", copy attached as Exhibit A), and other similar advertising associations, wherein the DOJ warned that entities and individuals placing advertisements for offshore sports books and online casinos may be violating various state and federal laws, including 18 U.S.C. §§ 1084, 1952 and 1955, and further warned that the entities or individuals that accept and run such advertisements may be aiding and abetting illegal activities, a Class E felony, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2.
The statutes cited by the DOJ impose severe penalties consisting of substantial fines and imprisonment.
Based upon information and belief, several months after the NAB Letter, numerous subpoenas were issued by the DOJ to media outlets, internet portals, public relations companies and technology companies seeking commercial and financial information in relation to advertisements purchased and placed by online casinos and sports book companies.
The aforesaid subpoenas and the NAB Letter have been the subject matter of numerous media reports.
Prior to the foregoing actions by the DOJ, the advertising industry was selling and running advertisements for online casino and sports book businesses that legally operate in the jurisdictions in which they are located. The NAB Letter and subpoenas, however, have created a fear of prosecution within the advertising community resulting in a chilling effect upon the exercise of free speech. On information and belief, as a direct result of the DOJ threats, a number of internet advertising portals based in the United States have ceased to accept advertising of legal casino and sports betting.
Casino City is a United States company that disseminates information on its internet sites such as interviews with professional gamblers, advice and expert columns, directories, playing strategies and tips, weekly news publications and news clips.
A portion of Casino City's revenues are derived from the sale and running of advertisements on its informational internet sites for lawful overseas companies that offer online casino or sports book gambling. The sale and placement of the advertisements is not contrary to the law of Louisiana.
The advertisements are not misleading and concern lawful activity.
Casino City does not conduct or participate in online casino or sports book activities. Casino City does not knowingly accept, in payment for running online casino or sports book advertisements, proceeds that come from illegal bets, deposits or wagers placed by persons located in the United States or anywhere world-wide, and the company has taken reasonable steps to ensure that such proceeds are not received.
The advertisements that Casino City sells and runs are of the same content and nature as those that the DOJ warned may constitute the offense of aiding and abetting a violator of 18 U.S.C. Sections 1084, 1952 and/or 1955. Thus, a reasonable and imminent threat of prosecution exists if Casino City continues to sell and run advertisements for overseas online casino and sports book operations.
Application of the aforesaid criminal statutes against the plaintiff and others similarly situated, as threatened by the DOJ, would constitute a violation of such entities' rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution in that:
*****(a) The United States does not have a substantial interest sufficient to justify the imposition upon the exercise of free expression resulting from such application and the threat of such application;
*****(b) The threatened application would not effectively serve any purported government interest; and
*****(c) The application is not narrowly drawn to effectuate any purported government interest.
WHEREFORE, for the above and foregoing reasons, Casino City prays for a judgment declaring:
That the application of 18 U.S.C. Sections 1084, 1952 and/or 1955 to Casino City and others similarly situated violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution;
That the application of 18 U.S.C. Section 2 to Casino City and others similarly situated, as aiding and abetting a violator of 18 U.S.C. sections 1084, 1952 and/or 1955, violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution; and
The actions of DOJ in threatening Casino City and others similarly situated with criminal prosecution as detailed above, violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
*****Casino City further prays for any other necessary or proper relief.
TAYLOR, PORTER, BROOKS & PHILLIPS L.L.P.
BY:________________________________________________
*****Fredrick R. Tulley #7534
*****Lloyd J. Lunceford #8439
*****Erick Y. Miyagi #22533
*****P. O. Box 2471
*****Baton Rouge, LA 70821
*****Telephone: 225-387-3221
*****Facsimile: 225-346-8049
**********and
*****GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A.
**********Barry Richard (FL Bar No. 105599)
**********Patrick O'Brien (FL Bar No. 866970)
**********Laureen E. Galeoto (FL Bar No. 194107)
*****101 East College Avenue
*****Post Office Drawer 1838
*****Tallahassee, FL 32302
*****Telephone: 850-222-6891
*****Facsimile: 850-681-0207
*****ATTORNEYS FOR CASINO CITY, INC.
http://online.casinocity.com/firstamendment/action.cfm
*UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
CIVIL ACTION
NO. 04-557-B-M3
SECTION
Chief Judge Frank J. Polozola
Magistrate Docia Dalby
CASINO CITY, INC.
VERSUS
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE
COMPLAINT
*****Plaintiff, Casino City, Inc., complains of defendant, United States Department of Justice, as follows:
This Court has original jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1331, as this action involves a federal question.
Venue properly rests with this Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1391(e), as the Defendant is an agency of the United States and the Plaintiff resides in this judicial district.
PARTIES
The Plaintiff Casino City, Inc., (hereinafter "Casino City"), is a for profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Louisiana.
Casino City operates the Casino City Network, a collection of portal sites, including CasinoCity.com and http://Online.CasinoCity.com, which disseminate information about land based and online casinos, casino style games and sports betting.
The Defendant is the United States Department of Justice, (hereinafter "DOJ"), an agency of the United States.
NATURE OF ACTION
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sections 2201 and 2202, Casino City seeks a declaration as to its constitutional rights to engage in lawful commercial speech.
FACTS
The DOJ has conducted and continues to conduct an active investigation into United States businesses that sell and place advertisements for legal overseas online casino and sports book companies.
In June 2003 the DOJ sent a letter to the National Association of Broadcasters ("NAB Letter", copy attached as Exhibit A), and other similar advertising associations, wherein the DOJ warned that entities and individuals placing advertisements for offshore sports books and online casinos may be violating various state and federal laws, including 18 U.S.C. §§ 1084, 1952 and 1955, and further warned that the entities or individuals that accept and run such advertisements may be aiding and abetting illegal activities, a Class E felony, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2.
The statutes cited by the DOJ impose severe penalties consisting of substantial fines and imprisonment.
Based upon information and belief, several months after the NAB Letter, numerous subpoenas were issued by the DOJ to media outlets, internet portals, public relations companies and technology companies seeking commercial and financial information in relation to advertisements purchased and placed by online casinos and sports book companies.
The aforesaid subpoenas and the NAB Letter have been the subject matter of numerous media reports.
Prior to the foregoing actions by the DOJ, the advertising industry was selling and running advertisements for online casino and sports book businesses that legally operate in the jurisdictions in which they are located. The NAB Letter and subpoenas, however, have created a fear of prosecution within the advertising community resulting in a chilling effect upon the exercise of free speech. On information and belief, as a direct result of the DOJ threats, a number of internet advertising portals based in the United States have ceased to accept advertising of legal casino and sports betting.
Casino City is a United States company that disseminates information on its internet sites such as interviews with professional gamblers, advice and expert columns, directories, playing strategies and tips, weekly news publications and news clips.
A portion of Casino City's revenues are derived from the sale and running of advertisements on its informational internet sites for lawful overseas companies that offer online casino or sports book gambling. The sale and placement of the advertisements is not contrary to the law of Louisiana.
The advertisements are not misleading and concern lawful activity.
Casino City does not conduct or participate in online casino or sports book activities. Casino City does not knowingly accept, in payment for running online casino or sports book advertisements, proceeds that come from illegal bets, deposits or wagers placed by persons located in the United States or anywhere world-wide, and the company has taken reasonable steps to ensure that such proceeds are not received.
The advertisements that Casino City sells and runs are of the same content and nature as those that the DOJ warned may constitute the offense of aiding and abetting a violator of 18 U.S.C. Sections 1084, 1952 and/or 1955. Thus, a reasonable and imminent threat of prosecution exists if Casino City continues to sell and run advertisements for overseas online casino and sports book operations.
Application of the aforesaid criminal statutes against the plaintiff and others similarly situated, as threatened by the DOJ, would constitute a violation of such entities' rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution in that:
*****(a) The United States does not have a substantial interest sufficient to justify the imposition upon the exercise of free expression resulting from such application and the threat of such application;
*****(b) The threatened application would not effectively serve any purported government interest; and
*****(c) The application is not narrowly drawn to effectuate any purported government interest.
WHEREFORE, for the above and foregoing reasons, Casino City prays for a judgment declaring:
That the application of 18 U.S.C. Sections 1084, 1952 and/or 1955 to Casino City and others similarly situated violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution;
That the application of 18 U.S.C. Section 2 to Casino City and others similarly situated, as aiding and abetting a violator of 18 U.S.C. sections 1084, 1952 and/or 1955, violates the First Amendment to the United States Constitution; and
The actions of DOJ in threatening Casino City and others similarly situated with criminal prosecution as detailed above, violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
*****Casino City further prays for any other necessary or proper relief.
TAYLOR, PORTER, BROOKS & PHILLIPS L.L.P.
BY:________________________________________________
*****Fredrick R. Tulley #7534
*****Lloyd J. Lunceford #8439
*****Erick Y. Miyagi #22533
*****P. O. Box 2471
*****Baton Rouge, LA 70821
*****Telephone: 225-387-3221
*****Facsimile: 225-346-8049
**********and
*****GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A.
**********Barry Richard (FL Bar No. 105599)
**********Patrick O'Brien (FL Bar No. 866970)
**********Laureen E. Galeoto (FL Bar No. 194107)
*****101 East College Avenue
*****Post Office Drawer 1838
*****Tallahassee, FL 32302
*****Telephone: 850-222-6891
*****Facsimile: 850-681-0207
*****ATTORNEYS FOR CASINO CITY, INC.
Jay is probably referring to the case of Casinocity which has posted the ongoing saga on its website.
http://online.casinocity.com/firstamendment/
Edit: OK response already made.
http://online.casinocity.com/firstamendment/
Edit: OK response already made.
Absolutely wrong JJ!!! The following is an excerpt from NY Times last Marchjjgold said:
"While it is illegal to run an Internet gambling operation in the United States, state laws vary as to whether the bettor is committing a crime. New York, for instance, prohibits operation or promotion of an unlicensed casino, but it does not make the act of placing a bet a crime, said Kenneth M. Dreifach, chief of the Internet bureau for the New York attorney general, Eliot Spitzer."
Many Radio Stations and Radio Networks take sportbook ads. I even heard one during a College Bowl game broadcast on national network radio. Radio Stations are not allowed to advertise illegal activities. You'll never hear an advertisement for Selling drugs, prostitution, etc. I know these broadcast entities have thorough legal departments, and in their views, Internet betting is not an illegal activity.
