Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,186

    Default DoJ reinterprets Wire Act; Poker is not a violation!

    http://www.justice.gov/olc/2011/stat...es-opinion.pdf

    DoJ as stated that the Wire Act, which supposedly made poker illegal under the UIGEA, only applies to "support events and contests." Therefore poker is not illegal on the federal level.

    In recent news, Nevada approved regulations for online poker yesterday. News links (thanks to a 2p2 poster)


    PC Mag.com: Nevada Greenlights Online Poker Within State Borders
    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2398041,00.asp

    USA Today: Nevada adopts rules for Internet poker licenses
    http://www.usatoday.com/sports/poker...ses/52195208/1

    WSJ: Justice Opinion Finds Room for Web Gambling
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj

    Breaking: Department of Justice Adjusts Stance on Internet Poker
    http://www.cardplayer.com/poker-news...internet-poker
    http://news.bluffmagazine.com/us-doj...betting-25683/
    http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/...s-legal-199568
    http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/...ire-act-199566

    Nevada Legalizes Online Poker
    http://reason.com/blog/2011/12/23/ne...s-online-poker
    http://www.parttimepoker.com/hnr-122...duhamel-update
    http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/...the-doj-199570
    Last edited by grimReaper; 24th December 2011 at 06:18 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    69

    Default

    great news!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,042

    Default

    So wtf does this mean? Can the big sites open up to us without getting frozen again?
    Think for yourself. Question authority.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,186

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by travz21 View Post
    So wtf does this mean? Can the big sites open up to us without getting frozen again?
    Not PS/AP/UB due to the BF agreement. Potentially FT - Tapie and DoJ agreed that FT would be allowed into the US market. Though there's a little controversy on that as it'll be up to the regulators on who is allowed to get a license.

    Maybe the rest of the sites like Party, but not immediately. UIGEA still enforces illegal gambling and each state has their own laws with respect to gambling, e.g regulations, who can offer games etc, and states like WA have a complete ban.

    Congress should know that if they don't act soon, intrastate sites are going to pop up, so this should be a strong push at the federal level. And if not, then we have intrastate poker for the time being, which will hopefully evolve into combined player pools. Nevada will accept license applicants in February, but unfortunately, Loveman said these regulators can take up to 1 year to get their act together.

    We should have a clearer picture of which way things are headed a few months now.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,186

    Default

    One clarification iirc is that the indictments were not based on violation of the Wire Act, rather violation of state laws. However, DoJ's clarification of the Wire Act allows intrastate poker and instrastate pooling among the states that agree.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,186

    Default

    I asked the following questions:

    1) Does Nevada still have to pass legislation before the first hand is dealt?
    2) How long will the regulators take to license sites? (1 year?)
    3) How long before 1) and 2) are satisfied?
    4) Estimates on how long before CA either pools with NV or has its own intrastate play?
    And a respected poster on another forum responded:

    1. Nevada already passed all the legislation it requires to start intrastate i-poker.

    2. They just completed the regulations this month. They are now working on the technical specifications, and are starting to process applications for a license. I would guess 3-6 months before the first licenses are issued.

    3. Expect live sites by 3rd quarter 2012, or 4th quarter on the outside.

    4. CA will probably take up their intrastate i-poker bill again in 1st quarter 2012. If it passes, they will likely take 12-18 months to implement it. They aren't going to want to pool with NV, but it may become a legal battle as to whether or not they can bar NV sites from accepting CA players (and vice versa).

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,042

    Default

    Who cares about intrastate poker. The player pools would be too small. When will people be able to play on PokerStars again? And does this mean PartyPoker can come back?
    Think for yourself. Question authority.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,186

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by travz21 View Post
    Who cares about intrastate poker. The player pools would be too small. When will people be able to play on PokerStars again? And does this mean PartyPoker can come back?
    Unsure about PS, they made an agreement to never serve US players. They could probably come back in some weird way like a casino partnering with them.

    I think Party is a possibility.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •