Outside of seizing management personnel and freezing/seizing assets.....what can the US do if the staff never visit the US and the books have their assets out of the grubby reach of US govt?
How sovereign are foreign banks and banking systems?
Of course, if the US just decides to invade their country, then (pardon the pun) most bets are off.
How sovereign are foreign banks and banking systems?
Of course, if the US just decides to invade their country, then (pardon the pun) most bets are off.
"Sheesh! Gimme your odds on invading Costa Rica to stop internet gambling."
Probably wouldn't go there just for that reason....but if we were in the neighborhood......I wouldn't put it past the US govt to overstep sovereign borders or take on impossible expeditions.....(impossible expeditions: Iraq and democracy, not to introduce politics to this thread)......
Noreiga got a wake up call one night in Panama from the dudes in helicopters who don't bother to knock on doors.....what was that over....drugs? You figure anyone here would just care less if some major US head of state was simply kidnapped and hauled off to some foreign country and thrown in jail?
Noreiga was just one example.....plenty of stories about countries getting invaded by the world cops flying American flags....
Probably wouldn't go there just for that reason....but if we were in the neighborhood......I wouldn't put it past the US govt to overstep sovereign borders or take on impossible expeditions.....(impossible expeditions: Iraq and democracy, not to introduce politics to this thread)......
Noreiga got a wake up call one night in Panama from the dudes in helicopters who don't bother to knock on doors.....what was that over....drugs? You figure anyone here would just care less if some major US head of state was simply kidnapped and hauled off to some foreign country and thrown in jail?
Noreiga was just one example.....plenty of stories about countries getting invaded by the world cops flying American flags....
"You didn't answer the question."
Absolutely did, in my first sentence: "probably wouldn't go there just for that reason..."
My tort about invading foreign countries was stated mainly out of sarcasm and US policy, not that we live to just go around kicking the doors of gamblers down.
Drop the bong and read some tonality into what I said in my initial response to this thread, Mr 46 post guy.:howdy:
Absolutely did, in my first sentence: "probably wouldn't go there just for that reason..."
My tort about invading foreign countries was stated mainly out of sarcasm and US policy, not that we live to just go around kicking the doors of gamblers down.
Drop the bong and read some tonality into what I said in my initial response to this thread, Mr 46 post guy.:howdy:
The bottom line is that telephone wagering is dangerous for operators, and so for players.Santo said:
They went after BetOnSports now because David Carruthers wiped the floor with congressman Leach in that Wall Street Journal debate over regulation back in April. Leach was made to look like the crazy zealot he is.
But what the prosecutors think will secure them their convictions is the use of that RV taking bets at the stadiums in 2002:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,9070-2280501_1,00.html
That's why they are secure that they can get BoS. The problem is we can see the Feds turning it into a precedent for application of the Wire Act to offshore operators, and that means trouble for phone wagering operations.
Internet only operations are in better shape though.
Internet or phone makes no difference.
The DOJ did not shut down BOS. BOS chose to shut down.
WSEX, Goldmedalsports, and WWTS have all been indicted and did not skip a beat.
The US government has no legal right to make sportsbooks offshore shut down.
Hopefully no more CEOs are dumb enough to come to the US. I wouldnt want to come here if I was in management of a sportsbook offshore, and I thought people were this smart, but all week, a manager from Sexywagers has been documenting exactly where he is in the United States - so all bets are off on who will come here.
For many many years, it was assumed if you started a sportsbook offshore you could never return to the US. I do not know what changed this opinion the past few years...
Barring invasion, the US can not shut sportsbooks. They can provide good times for a book to dissapear and blame the US and they can cause a book big time problems if the book uses credit cards extensively. I would stay away from books that advertise - cards never declined, or we use special processors... Although after the BOS fiasco, I would assume most books are now keeping their funds in a different bank than where their card processor deposits.
If the US wants to invade CR over gambling, books will close. The general public in the US will not tolerate this. Most people are against cocaine, heroin, etc. Most people are not against gambling. Additionally, sportsbooks have the WTO behind them, their newest ruling should be here in two months, and the US would be in a real mess if they invade a country following the WTO ruling.
Can the US shut sportsbook? No
Can the US give a shitty sportsbook and opportune time to dissapear? Yes.
-Sean
The DOJ did not shut down BOS. BOS chose to shut down.
WSEX, Goldmedalsports, and WWTS have all been indicted and did not skip a beat.
The US government has no legal right to make sportsbooks offshore shut down.
Hopefully no more CEOs are dumb enough to come to the US. I wouldnt want to come here if I was in management of a sportsbook offshore, and I thought people were this smart, but all week, a manager from Sexywagers has been documenting exactly where he is in the United States - so all bets are off on who will come here.
For many many years, it was assumed if you started a sportsbook offshore you could never return to the US. I do not know what changed this opinion the past few years...
Barring invasion, the US can not shut sportsbooks. They can provide good times for a book to dissapear and blame the US and they can cause a book big time problems if the book uses credit cards extensively. I would stay away from books that advertise - cards never declined, or we use special processors... Although after the BOS fiasco, I would assume most books are now keeping their funds in a different bank than where their card processor deposits.
If the US wants to invade CR over gambling, books will close. The general public in the US will not tolerate this. Most people are against cocaine, heroin, etc. Most people are not against gambling. Additionally, sportsbooks have the WTO behind them, their newest ruling should be here in two months, and the US would be in a real mess if they invade a country following the WTO ruling.
Can the US shut sportsbook? No
Can the US give a shitty sportsbook and opportune time to dissapear? Yes.
-Sean
Additionally, if you are the CEO of a major offshore gambling company, and you have just made fun of an idiot senator, coming to the US is really stupid.
It is kind of like saying you hate Saddam and then walking into one of his palaces 5 years ago unarmed.
Finally, I really believe DC is gonna win if he fights the charges and then all enforcement is over. Remember the feds have to find 12 people who are willing to put a UK businessman in jail for taking bets. You chance of one of those people feeling either gambing is ok or that arresting a UK businessman who was breaking no laws in CR or the UK is wrong has to be well over 50%. The judge can steer the case, but the settlement towards the internet and gambling is very different now than back in 98 when JC was convicted. In 98, people were just learning about the internet. Now 40,000,000+ gamble online from the US. It is a normal part of society and if you pick 12 random people 2-3 likely gamble online. Additionally, DC will have the UK government on his side (The counsel general attended the court dates already) Additionally, DC will have the WTO ruling on his side and likely if the US again chooses not to comply sanctions against the US. All of this will make a jury less likely to convict someone who was operating legally in the UK, CR, and based on the WTO's laws.
Now, what I wonder is if the DOJ realizes they are gonna lose, will they drop the case like Colorado did with Kobe?
Finally, part of the WTO's ruling in two months could include the complete release of DC. IF I was his lawyer, I would be meeting with the ruling body now.
-Sean
It is kind of like saying you hate Saddam and then walking into one of his palaces 5 years ago unarmed.
Finally, I really believe DC is gonna win if he fights the charges and then all enforcement is over. Remember the feds have to find 12 people who are willing to put a UK businessman in jail for taking bets. You chance of one of those people feeling either gambing is ok or that arresting a UK businessman who was breaking no laws in CR or the UK is wrong has to be well over 50%. The judge can steer the case, but the settlement towards the internet and gambling is very different now than back in 98 when JC was convicted. In 98, people were just learning about the internet. Now 40,000,000+ gamble online from the US. It is a normal part of society and if you pick 12 random people 2-3 likely gamble online. Additionally, DC will have the UK government on his side (The counsel general attended the court dates already) Additionally, DC will have the WTO ruling on his side and likely if the US again chooses not to comply sanctions against the US. All of this will make a jury less likely to convict someone who was operating legally in the UK, CR, and based on the WTO's laws.
Now, what I wonder is if the DOJ realizes they are gonna lose, will they drop the case like Colorado did with Kobe?
Finally, part of the WTO's ruling in two months could include the complete release of DC. IF I was his lawyer, I would be meeting with the ruling body now.
-Sean
I should also add -
I do not think the DOJ thought indicting BOS would cause them not to pay US players. The DOJ likely thought they would pay right away.
If offshores make $12,000,000,000 from US players each year (And most think that is a low estimate) they hold far more than $12,000,000,000 offshore. Costing the US generally public many times $12B is not good for the economy.
-Sean
I do not think the DOJ thought indicting BOS would cause them not to pay US players. The DOJ likely thought they would pay right away.
If offshores make $12,000,000,000 from US players each year (And most think that is a low estimate) they hold far more than $12,000,000,000 offshore. Costing the US generally public many times $12B is not good for the economy.
-Sean
In the BoS case you're right but if this is the start of a crackdown then if the Leach bill doesn't pass the Senate they will go after phone operators as for the Wire Act there are cases that support their position for sports so I don't agree that phones and Internet are the same.sean1 said:
But this does feel like a one off political grudge attack against Carruthers, not a general crackdown. If it was general they would have gone after many operations in one go like they did with Jay Cohen and co in March 1998.
I would be interested to read the text of the debate with D Carruthers versus Leech (the WSJ that was mentioned) , I bet it would be a very interesting read
Lets put it this way, if US invades CR then they must invade Antigua then Gibraltar then India then the indian reservation in Canada (Mohawk or something like that)
no wonder I keep seeing so many ads on tv about joining the army.........
On a serious note, if the US would want to stop egaming in anyway that would have a slight chance of success it would be through internet filters..........the technology exists since the US sold it to China so that China could block what their citizens read
However there are PLENTY of technical (some easy and some not so easy) ways to bypass this
Short of implementing the Thought Police and the telescreens in each house of the country I would not give them ANY chance of succesfully blocking 100% of internet gaming
Just like the Prohibition ........it would have a small effect for a while and after that the powers that be will come to their senses
Lets put it this way, if US invades CR then they must invade Antigua then Gibraltar then India then the indian reservation in Canada (Mohawk or something like that)
no wonder I keep seeing so many ads on tv about joining the army.........
On a serious note, if the US would want to stop egaming in anyway that would have a slight chance of success it would be through internet filters..........the technology exists since the US sold it to China so that China could block what their citizens read
However there are PLENTY of technical (some easy and some not so easy) ways to bypass this
Short of implementing the Thought Police and the telescreens in each house of the country I would not give them ANY chance of succesfully blocking 100% of internet gaming
Just like the Prohibition ........it would have a small effect for a while and after that the powers that be will come to their senses
