Nov 17th = Dooms Day

[liladypokerpro]

Unless KY Traffic Blockage is Shown by Nov 17, Judge Orders Domains Seized
by PokerPages.com
Fri, Oct 17th, 2008 @ 12:00am

Kentucky circuit court Judge Thomas Wingate ruled October 16 to uphold the domain seizure of 141 online poker and Internet gambling sites to the Commonwealth of Kentucky, EXCEPT sites whose owners "or respective registrants or their agent, or any other person with an interest or a claim" can demonstrate in person to the court that their site blocks traffic to Kentucky residents on or before a hearing on November 17. If blockage to Kentucky residents is not demonstrated, then the domains will be forfeited to the commonwealth.

On the downside for Kentucky state coffers, the ruling did not order any fine to be paid to the state.

Also, the question has been raised by gambling911 whether any person that appears before the court representing a domain to prove traffic has been blocked to Kentucky could "ultimately be subpoenaed. The judge implies immunity in his decision but that is a really hard call."

THE CORE MATTER: KENTUCKY'S FORFEITURE LAW

At the heart of the matter is the Kentucky law saying "any gambling device or gambling record possessed or used in violation of this chapter is forfeited to the state, and shall be disposed of in accordance with KRS 500.900, except that the provisions of this section shall not apply to charitable gaming activity as defined by KRS 528.101(1)."

SUMMARY OF JUDGE'S OPINION AND ORDER

Wingate wrote a 44-page opinion for upholding his initial order for the seizure, stating in his summary that "judicial interference of the Internet will NOT create havoc," and furthermore that the "Internet with all its benefits to modern day commerce and life, is still not above the law, whether on an international or municipal level."

You can read the entire document that Gambling911 kindly posted a copy of, at: http://www.gambling911.com/files/ima...onandOrder.pdf.

In the Opinion and Order the Judge addresses the issues raised at the September 25 and October 7 hearings. Here are highlights of some of the judge's replies to those issues raised:
# Are the Defendants 141 Domain Names Property? Reply: the Judge cited other cases that shows domain names have value similar to property, as they are definable, can be exclusively claimed, and can be auctioned. Therefore they are property.
# Do the defendants 141 Domain Names have a presence in Kentucky? Reply: because they do business in Kentucky, they have a presence. He dismisses the argument that no domain name is registered in Kentucky.
# Are the Domain Names, by reason of their illegal or unlawful use, gambling devices? Reply: The Judge says that he follows the spirit of the Kentucky gambling device description and because the 141 domain names connect to 'virtual casinos', they act as gambling devices.
# Is poker "Gambling" as defined by KRS 528.010(3)? Reply: Because poker has all 3 elements that define gambling: the element of chance, risking something of value for a chance to win a prize, and the awarding of a prize to the successful player, that online poker is gambling.

FRIEND OF COURT

In his opinion, the judge noted that only PPA, iMEGA, the Internet Commerce Association (ICA) and Network Solutions Inc (NSI) have 'friend-of-court status' and can continue to "present briefs and memoranda for purposes of informing the court of the ever-changing facets of the Internet," but they could not represent any domain.

GAMBLING & INTERNET COMMUNITY REACTION

"Clearly, we believe the judge in this case got it wrong," said John Pappas, executive director of the Poker Players Alliance(PPA). "First of all, we strongly disagree with Judge Wingate's ruling that poker is not a game of skill. As demonstrated in the amicus brief we filed, skill plays an essential role in being a successful poker player. Additionally, we believe that by confirming Governor [Steve] Beshear's actions, the court has set a dangerous precedent for censorship of the Internet. Today's ruling is a big step backward for both personal rights and Internet freedom."

Joe Brennan Jr., chairman of the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA) said, "What Judge Wingate has done is to create the 'ultimate weapon' to be used by the powerful and influential to attack content they oppose. This will enable government to eliminate competition from differing ideas, beliefs and commerce. This decision today is where it starts, but where will it stop?"

Brennan noted that iMEGA had already prepared for this possible result from the Kentucky court, and will challenge this decision at both the Federal and State courts, to prevent "this cancer from metastasizing and threatening the entire online world."

"This decision must not be allowed to stand, because of the threat it poses to the Internet as a whole," said Brennan. "Judge Wingate has ignored the clear laws of his own state in coming to a decision that essentially green-lights any jurisdiction - in the US and abroad - to ignore our rights and abuse their power to do away with competition or speech or content with which they oppose, regardless of the law. This is a dark day for Internet freedom."

PPA PRESSES LEGISLATION & REGULATION NOT PROHIBITION

"I am certain that many of the plaintiffs in this case intend to quickly appeal this matter,"noted John Pappas, executive director of the PPA. "We are confident that the Kentucky Appellate Court will review the facts and overturn today's order. At the same time, the PPA will continue its efforts to protect the rights of Kentucky citizens to play poker online."

Pappas added, "To truly address Governor Beshear's concerns with online gaming, the PPA continues to encourage the introduction of legislation, modeled after federal legislation such as that introduced by Senator Robert Menendez and Congressman Barney Frank, that would license and regulate online gaming. This approach would allow Kentucky to legally capture millions of dollars to increase revenue and fund critical state programs."

[mollila]

Originally Posted by liladypokerpro Judge Thomas Wingate ruled October 16 to uphold the domain seizure of 141 online poker and Internet gambling sites to the Commonwealth of Kentucky, EXCEPT sites whose owners "or respective registrants or their agent, or any other person with an interest or a claim" can demonstrate in person to the court that their site blocks traffic to Kentucky residents on or before a hearing on November 17.

One interesting requirement there is demonstrate in person, as many poker room executives cannot set foot to American soil or they can face imprisonment.

[andrewK]

This is nothing but laughable. This judge can not seize a domain name because he says so unless the owner of the domain name lives in Kentucky. This can not be enforced, the US government, let alone the Kentucky government, does not enforce domain name policies. ICANN does, and they are not controlled by any single government. This would have to go to ICANN and ICANN would laugh them out, if any silly government could just say "I don't like that domain, give it to me" then the internet would not exist as it does today and would seize to exist almost overnight.

Don't give this a second thought, this is just another idiot in power who has no idea how this "series of tubes" actually works and starts saying crazy things.

This is also not the first time some small government has tried to pull a stunt like this, everyone has a laugh and hopefully the judge is either voted out for making decisions about something he doesn't understand or will educate himself after realizing what a fool he is.

[liladypokerpro]

From what I understand, they are not going to "seize" in the literal sense...as you are correct they cannot "seize" anything which they do not own or control. However, they CAN force KY Internet Providers to block access to certain domains, and I think this is what they mean by "seize" - not as in to take, but as in to stop.

[andrewK]

Nope they can't do that, it is against the law. They have been trying to do things like that for years but its illegal. They usually use the guise of "child porn" but as of current they can't block whole domains at the ISP level. There are only a few places that do this, the biggest of course is China but Belarus and whatnot have fun trying.

[liladypokerpro]

Well I hope you're right...but I can't take the risk...can't afford fines and certainly can't afford prosecution.

[gamer4life27]

Yeah, I work in a law firm, and I do not see this happening. They couldn't seize a site just because it is for gambling. Unless it is against the US's rules, then Kentucky can't enforce rules that they set right then and there.

Please note that I do not know Kentucky rules, only California rules. So I would think they would have to petition for a motion to be made by the government to put the banning of online gambling for Kentucky on a ballet. Then, Kentucky would have to vote yes on this. If and only if they say yes in a majority, then they can ban traffic in and out of Kentucky for online gambling. But since I believe there is no such measure on this matter, they can not enforce this 'new rule' that this judge wishes to implement.

[WECpoker]

Well I discussed a similar post in another forum...but suffice to say

The state is in fact attempting to seize the actual domain names...and the intial ruling from the judge favors the state and many domain authorites have given the judge what he needs to shut down the names and give them to the State of Kentucky

The case has been appealed to the Court of Appeals to have them dismiss the case based on lack of jurisdiction...Also, the judge has deferred the final ruling until Dec 3rd (No doubt this will be appealed again on many levels once a final ruling is made)

This reaches beyond internet gambling and many observers on this matter do not beleive the state can survive the ultimate appeals test *however far they may have to go

Suffice to say there are many people against this ruling and many of them are outside the gambling industry due to the implications this case would have on all of e-commerce.

As far as the OP of this thread having to take the programs off her computer..that is laughable

Washington State makes it a felony to play and tons of people still play online and no one has been arrested.....There is no way Kentucky will be visiting the individual players to stop their poker play

There is always a technological way around any such attempts to stop these things in the US

[andrewK]

Yes as WECpoker says, they can't stop you. It is illigal for the government to monitor all your banking transactions (would be very very scary if they could) and they can't monitor your web traffic (ditto on scaryness)

This is just one of those laws that is just there but never can be enforced and is just another example of the government going overboard with its power. Do not take this seriously.

[liladypokerpro]

The only reason I'm being cautious about it is becuase I help run a security business here in town...so laughable or not, I cannot take a risk which could have legal consequences.

I never said anything about removing the clients from my desktop. I know that (by their definition of gambling) I can still play in freerolls legally, because freerolls do NOT fit all 3 elements they've listed to be considered gambling...to review:

"...3 elements that define gambling: the element of chance, risking something of value for a chance to win a prize, and the awarding of a prize to the successful player, that online poker is gambling."

As we all know there is no "risking something of value" in a freeroll, therefore freerolls should legally be exempt from this rule in my eyes.

As far as anything else goes though, I will tread very lightly until a final decision has been reached.

[irishpkr]

Based on the 3 elements given, a fucking load of things should be banned. Think of those 3 elements, then think about 'Stock Market' and 'Investment Banking'. Hell the banks were gambling with money they didnt even have!

[WECpoker]

Originally Posted by liladypokerpro The only reason I'm being cautious about it is becuase I help run a security business here in town...so laughable or not, I cannot take a risk which could have legal consequences. I never said anything about removing the clients from my desktop. I know that (by their definition of gambling) I can still play in freerolls legally, because freerolls do NOT fit all 3 elements they've listed to be considered gambling...to review: "...3 elements that define gambling: the element of chance, risking something of value for a chance to win a prize, and the awarding of a prize to the successful player, that online poker is gambling." As we all know there is no "risking something of value" in a freeroll, therefore freerolls should legally be exempt from this rule in my eyes. As far as anything else goes though, I will tread very lightly until a final decision has been reached.

Just to add...As far as stopping play Nov 16th, Dec 3rd or whatever this case is talking about, really has nothing to do with you. Unless I have read something wrong, this case is solely concerning sites that should be stopping/blocking online play and has nothing to do about when you should stop playing.

There must be a specific Kentucky Law already passed (which it appears to be the case) that makes it illegal for you to play. If thats the case and you intend to follow that law, you shouldnt be playing period....not waiting until Nov 16th or whatever it was

Best of Luck whatever you decide....but Im not familar with the Kentucky Law and its penalties on individuals, so you have to make up your mind on how to proceed..nothing wrong with being careful

[WECpoker]

Here is the real Dooms Day possibility for online poker (at least in America)

Agencies Issue Final Rule to Implement Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act

[WECpoker]

Originally Posted by WECpoker Here is the real Dooms Day possibility for online poker (at least in America) Agencies Issue Final Rule to Implement Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act

....and here is the hopeful white knight coming to the rescue (we hope)

[Press Release] PPA Condemns Finalization of Internet Gaming Regulations
Calls on New Administration, Congress to Overturn Flawed Policy

[liladypokerpro]

WEC thanks for those helpful links...I will be keeping an eye out on this.