Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

DOJ Seizes Online Poker Site Domains

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the know-when-to-fold-em dept.

Censorship 379

An anonymous reader writes "Federal authorities have seized Internet domain names used by three major poker companies. The indictment charges eleven defendants (PDF), including the founders of PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker and Absolute Poker, with bank fraud, money laundering and illegal gambling offenses, according to Federal authorities in New York. The United States also filed a civil money laundering and in rem forfeiture complaint against the poker companies, their assets, and the assets of several payment processors for the poker companies."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Victimless "crime" (3, Insightful)

jrj102 (87650) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832868)

I'm just glad to hear that all of the crimes against victims have been solved and the perpetrators brought to justice, giving the DOJ time to focus on victimless "crimes" like online poker.

At least I assume that's what happened.

Re:Victimless "crime" (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35832918)

In kind (although a different Fed organization), I'm also equally glad that GE and Donald Trump paid their fair share of taxes this year, so when I get audited you don't hold any kind of grudge whatsoever.

At least I assume that's what happened.

Re:Victimless "crime" (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35832936)

I'm just glad to hear that all of the crimes against victims have been solved and the perpetrators brought to justice, giving the DOJ time to focus on victimless "crimes" like online poker.

At least I assume that's what happened.

I was under the same impression when they started cracking down on medical marijuana dispensaries and performing legwork for the RIAA and MPAA...

Re:Victimless "crime" (2)

i kan reed (749298) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832944)

I agree with you that banning gambling is ridiculous moralizing that serves no purpose but to arbitrarily restrict the freedom of citizens. Especially in this case because the gamblers aren't even all U.S. residents. However, if these gambling establishments aren't regulated somehow, they tend to become, essentially, fraud engines. Either by the owners or enterprising players. And that level of laisez faire shouldn't really be allowed either. It's a false dilemma, but if I had to choose between no gambling and unregulated gambling, I'd likely choose the former.

Re:Victimless "crime" (2)

Samalie (1016193) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833082)

I disagree.

I would rather have the freedom to choose whether or not I would risk my money in an unregulated gambling house than to be forced by the government to not gamble.

In either case, the result is the same...I wouldn't gamble. But I sill believe in the right to choose.

Re:Victimless "crime" (2)

jrj102 (87650) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833116)


I'm not against regulating online poker-- but I am against prohibition. The absence of regulation does not excuse the prohibition.

Re:Victimless "crime" (2)

i kan reed (749298) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833236)

Well, I can see the basic point of your argument. Either way though, the fault lies with (U.S. style) conservatives. Their fiscal wing is anti-regulation, making proper regulation hard, and their social wing is anti-gambling, making them ban it. Quite the obnoxious pairing.

Re:Victimless "crime" (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833218)

And yet I don't. Sorry, but I don't believe in people's right to choose to take advantage of others, to cheat, to lie, and to commit fraud.

You want the freedom to do that?

Then we're at an impasse it seems.

Re:Victimless "crime" (2)

jrj102 (87650) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833274)

Who did they cheat, exactly? The only fraud they committed was incorrectly identifying the purpose of the dollars exchanged because the U.S. unreasonably (and illegally, I might add) restricts online poker.

There are no allegations of cheating the users, who desire the services these sites are providing.

Re:Victimless "crime" (0)

Samalie (1016193) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833492)

The only people who have been taken advantage of in this are the people who have real money in accounts on these gaming sites.

They have been taken advantage of by the US Government.

This shows what a fucking joke the USA has become. Die away from me.

Re:Victimless "crime" (1)

pixelpusher220 (529617) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833118)

if I had to choose between no gambling and unregulated gambling, I'd likely choose the former.

Which is perfectly reasonable. The bans on online gambling sites effectively border on having a government agent prevent you from entering a casino in Morocco because your local laws prohibit gambling.

I'm perfectly fine with the US gov't preventing gambling companies from being located in the US. But the internet is like someone in Canada making a sign that we can see from the US. You can try to put up walls to block the sign, but all I have to do is drive down the road and I can see it again. It doesn't work.

Re:Victimless "crime" (2, Interesting)

SolemnDwarf (863575) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833144)

It's a false dilemma, but if I had to choose between no gambling and unregulated gambling, I'd likely choose the former.

And I'd choose the latter.

Absolute bullshit. I find this kind of intervention ridiculous. It all comes down to money. They saw a thriving business that they couldn't get their claws into, so they shut it down.

As I read on /. the other day: "It's fun, therefore it's not allowed."

Re:Victimless "crime" (-1, Offtopic)

copyrightultimatum (2042420) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832992)

"Portal 2 is breaking some new ground – at least the PlayStation 3 version is. 'Portal 2 marks the first time that Valve's social gaming network

Begging the question. []

(and digital distribution system), Steam, will appear on consoles,' writes blogger Peter Smith. What this means is that once you link your Playstation Network [PSN] and Steam accounts 'you'll be able to keep tabs on wh

Appeal to law. []

hat your Steam friends are up to from within a game of Portal 2 on the PS3,' says Smith. And, you'll be able to play Portal 2 with friends playing on PC or Mac. 'I can think of at least one other example of cross-platfor

Appeal to law. []

rm gaming (Shadowrun supported both PC and Xbox players in the same game servers),' says Smith, 'but it's still very rare.'" "Oracle has stated they will give back the productivity suite to the community. Edward Screv

Appeal to emotion. []

ven, Oracle's Chief Corporate Architect, said the company intends upon 'working immediately with community members to further the

Appeal to emotion. []

continued success of Open Office.' Because there was a 'breadth of interest in free personal productivity applications,' the company believes the project would be 'best managed by an organization focuse

Begging the question. []

ed on serving that broad constituency on a non-commercial basis.'" "I have been reading Linux Shell Scripting Cookbook by Sarath Lakshman, published by Packt, for a while. While most people I know learn she

Appeal to ignorance. []

ell scripts themselves, I was looking to refresh my concepts a little as well as have a reference lying around on the table for fast access." An anonymous reader tips a University of Michigan

Appeal to law. []

news release about the creation of what's being called an "optical battery" that could lead to the use of solar power without traditional solar cells (abstract). Quoting: "Light has electric and magnetic c

Appeal to law. []

components. Until now, scientists thought the effects of the magnetic field were so weak that they could be ignored. What Rand and his colleagues fou

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

und is that at the right intensity, when light is traveling through a material that does not conduct electricity, the light field can generate magnetic effects that are 100 million times stronger than pre

Appeal to ignorance. []

eviously expected. Under these circumstances, the magnetic effects develop strength equivalent to a strong electric effect. 'This could lead to a new kind of solar cell withou

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

ut semiconductors and without absorption to produce charge separation,' Rand said. 'In solar cells, the light goes into a material, gets absorbed and creates heat. Here,

Begging the question. []

we expect to have a very low heat load. Instead of the light being absorbed, energy is stored in the magnetic moment. Intense magnetization can be induced by intense light and then it is ultimately

Appeal to emotion. []

capable of providing a capacitive power source.'" "Mozilla and Opera are mocking browser rival Microsoft's use of the term 'native HTML5' to describe Internet Explorer 9 and the in-development IE10 as an oxymoron, an attempt to hijack

Appeal to ignorance. []

an open standard and a marketing ploy. On Tuesday, Microsoft's Dean Hachamovitch, the executive who runs the IE group, used the term several times during a keynote at MIX, the company's annual Web developers

Red herring. []

conference, and in an accompanying post on the IE blog. Hachamovitch claimed in his keynote that, 'The only native experience of t

Straw man. []

the Web of HTML5 today is on Windows 7 with IE9.' Asa Dotzler, Mozilla's director of community development, replied mockingly in Bugzilla: 'I'm pretty sure Firefox 5 has "complete native HTML5" support. We should reso

Appeal to emotion. []

olve this as fixed and be sure to let the world know we beat Microsoft to shipping *complete* native HTML5.'" "It appears that Skype account information on an Android phone remains readable by all in a

Appeal to ignorance. []

standard installation, at least for certain versions of Skype out in the wild. That allows another potentially malicious app to know everything about you th

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

hat Skype knows (contacts, history of whatever you've chatted about or who you called, phone numbers, personal information). Skype is said to be working to fix for what appe

Begging the question. []

ears to be a simple file permissions issue. This sheds some more light on how much private information everybody gives away for free by just owning a

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

a phone with half a wrong chmod." Frequent contributor Bennett Haselton is back with an article about how sites with huge amounts of user-generated content struggle to deal with abuse complaints, and could benefit from a crowd-source

False dilemma. []

ed policing system similar to Slashdot's meta-moderation. He writes "In The Net Delusion, Evgeny Morozov cites examples of online mobs that filed phony abuse complaints in order to shut do

Appeal to popularity. []

own pro-democracy Facebook groups and YouTube videos criticizing the Saudi royal family. I've got an idea for an algorithm that would help solve the problem, and I'm offering $100 (or a donation to a charity of your choice) for the best sugges

Red herring. []

sted improvement, or alternative, or criticism of the idea proposed in this article." Hit the link below to read the rest of his thoughts. "The BBC reports that

Appeal to authority. []

ad-supported music service Spotify is bringing strict limits to its service, allowing users ten hours listening time per month and a lifetime total of five plays per track. Rory Cellan-Jones discusses how much their hand was for

Appeal to popularity. []

rced by the labels, and how much it was down to their own desire to move more than the current 15% of users to their paid subscriptions. The overwhelming reaction from users seems to be st

Appeal to authority. []

traightforward disappointment at the loss of a service which managed to bridge the commercial radio business model and modern listening habits. As the first response to the announcement said: 'So long Spotify. It was nice knowing you. Guess I'll go back to

Red herring. []

o pirating music again then.'" "The developers of GIMP have finally released a new development version on the way to GIMP 2.8. GIMP 2.7.2 includes a huge bunch of changes — but it is not intended for production use. 'The new release com

Appeal to ignorance. []

mprises layer groups (which were introduced after 2.7.1), an almost done text-on-canvas feature, the all-new brush engine and of course the new single window

Appeal to authority. []

w mode.'" Old Wolf writes "A New Zealand evolutionary psychologist, Quentin Atkinson, has created a scientific sensation by claiming to have discovered the mother of all

Begging the question. []

l mother tongues. 'Dr Atkinson took 504 languages and plotted the number of phonemes in each (corrected for recent population growth, when significant) against the distance betwee

False dilemma. []

en the place where the language is spoken and 2,500 putative points of origin, scattered across the world (abstract). The relationship that emerges suggests the actual point of origin is in central or southern Africa, and that all modern l

Appeal to emotion. []

languages do, indeed, have a common root." Reader NotSanguine points out another study which challenges the idea that the brain is more important to the structure of language

Appeal to flattery. []

than cultural evolution. "Karen Sandler (a lawyer at the Software Freedom Law Center) and Mike Tarantino (a professional musician) are get

Straw man. []

tting married in May. They've sent out the coolest wedding invitation ever: a beautifully packaged flexidisc record where the invitation itself is the record player. The song was written by Mike, is performed

Appeal to law. []

by Karen and Mike together, and FTW is released under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license. The person who designed the invitations — a friend of the couple's — has blogged about it." "The Association o

Appeal to ignorance. []

of American Publishers revealed today that e-book sales have tripled in the last year. Sixteen publishers reported that in February e-book sales totaled more than $90.3 million, a 202.3% increase over e-book sales in

Begging the question. []

February of 2010. Meanwhile, sales of adult hardcover books have dropped 43%, while mass-market paperback sales dropped 41.5% (earning just $46.2 million and $29.3 million, r

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

respectively). The book publishing association acknowledged that readers have 'made e-books permanent additions to their lifestyle,' arguing th

Appeal to flattery. []

hat publishers 'are constantly redefining the timeless concept of "books"' and identifying new audiences they can serve through emerging technologies. 'It

Appeal to popularity. []

t's nice to see that book publishers are aware of the changes rocking their industry,' notes one e-book blog, 'and that they're approaching it with a sense of history.'" "The

Appeal to authority. []

e creator of hypertext has criticized the design of the World Wide Web, saying that Tim Berners-Lee's creation is 'completely wrong,' and that Windows, Macintosh and Linux have 'exactly the same' approach to computing. Ted Nelson, f

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

founder of first hypertext project, Project Xanadu, went on to say, 'It is a strange, distorted, peculiar and difficult limited s

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

system... the browser is built around invisible links — you can see something to click on but you’ve got nowhere else to go.'" "The main idea behind saving energy in the high-tech world has be

False dilemma. []

een to buy newer, more energy efficient devices, but researchers say that may be the wrong way to look at the issue, since as much as 70% of the energy a typical laptop will consume during its life spa

Appeal to authority. []

an is used in manufacturing the computer (abstract). More energy would be conserved by reducing power used in the manufacturing of computers, rather than reducing o

Appeal to emotion. []

only the amount of energy required to operate them, say researchers from Arizona State University and Rochester Institute of Technology." "IBM has released an online HTML5 editing tool called Maqetta, hosted by the Dojo Foundation. eWe

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

eek calls it an open source answer to Flash and Silverlight. That remains to be seen, but it does look interesting." The International Game Developers Association has posted a warning to the game dev

Appeal to law. []

velopment community about the Amazon Appstore's distribution terms, detailing several unfavorable situations possible under the rules and saying, "Amazon has little incentive not to u

Appeal to ignorance. []

use a developer's content as a weapon with which to capture marketshare from competing app stores." "Amazon does not need the terms it has established for itself in order to give away a free app every day. Nor does it need the

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

powers it has granted itself to execute a wide variety of price promotions. Other digital games platforms, such as Xbox LIVE Arcade and Steam, manage to run effective promotions very frequently without employing these terms. Amazon may fu

Begging the question. []

urther argue that its success depends on the success of its development partners, and therefore, that it would never abuse the terms of its distribution agreement. Given that Amazon can

Appeal to emotion. []

n (and currently does) function perfectly well without these terms in other markets, it is unclear why game developers should take a leap of faith on Amazon’s behalf. Such leaps are rarely rewarded once a retailer achieves do

Appeal to authority. []

ominance." "Economies of scale mean that densely populated cities have generally been the ones to benefit from the roll out of superfast

Straw man. []

broadband networks, while those in rural areas have missed out. Following Google's recent announcement that it will build and test 1Gbps fiber-to-the-home

Appeal to emotion. []

e (FTTH) networks in selected cities with between 50,000 and 500,000 residents in the US, starting with Kansas City, Kansas, Fujitsu has unveiled plans to create a similar superfast FTT

Appeal to popularity. []

TH broadband network for five million homes and businesses in rural Britain to bridge the digital divide between city and country." "Game Informer has reportedly received word from 'multiple sources

Appeal to authority. []

s' that a new HD console from Nintendo will be debuting at this year's E3. They report on conflicting information regarding the power of the console compared to the oth

Begging the question. []

her current-gen consoles, but go on to speculate that 'Either way it will offer competitive specifications.'" " has added a new intermediate development state, Aurora, to its Firefox development chain. Coming be

Appeal to ignorance. []

etween Nightly-Build and Beta, it adds a fourth sense to the meaning of 'the current version of Firefox' (the Release version fills out the trope). And now they have populated the Aurora channel with what will eventually become Firefo

Appeal to flattery. []

ox 5. The intent is to reduce release-version cycle times by allowing more live testing of new features before the integrated code gets into a Beta version. The in

Appeal to law. []

naugural Aurora drop includes 'performance, security and stability improvements.' Firefox 5 is scheduled to enter Beta on May 17, and Release on June 21. Downloads of all of the active channels are available from the Firefox channels webpage." "

Appeal to emotion. []

"As New Zealand politicians are looking to rush through a new copyright law, 92A, which imposes a 'three strikes' regime on people accused of file sharing, some New Zealanders were a bit amused to see Parliam

Appeal to law. []

ment Member Melissa Lee stand up to speak in favor of the bill just hours after tweeting how she was enjoying a compilation of music put together for her by a friend. Does that

Appeal to authority. []

t count as her first strike?" "From the developers, Opus is a non-patent encumbered codec designed for interactive usages, such as VoIP, telepresence, and remote jamming, that require very low latency. When they started work

Straw man. []

king on Opus (then known as CELT), they used the slogan 'Why can't your telephone sound as good as your stereo?', and they weren't kidding. Now, test results demonstrate that Opus's performance against HE-AAC, one of the stro

Appeal to flattery. []

ongest (but highest-latency) codecs at this bitrate, bests the quality of two of the most popular and respected encoders for the format, on the majority of individual audio samples receiving a higher average score overall. Hy

Appeal to ignorance. []

ydrogenaudio conducted a 64kbit/sec multiformat listening test including Opus, aoTuV Vorbis, two HE-AAC encoders, and a 48kbit/sec AAC-LC low anchor. Comparing 30 diverse samples using the highly sensitive ABC/HR methodology, Opus

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

s is running with 22.5ms of total latency but the codec can go as low as 5ms." "When asked about letting governments in Asia and the Middle East into the 's

Appeal to ignorance. []

secure' message service used by their BlackBerry devices, Mike Lazaridis, the co-chief executive of RIM, walked out of the interview and said, 'We've dealt with this, the question is no fair.' By 'dealt with,' we can

Appeal to law. []

only assume he meant: 'been paid handsomely to let governments read what they wish.'" "Past Blender releases, as capable as they were, had learning curves somewhere between straight up and down and 90 degrees. The release of Blende

Appeal to flattery. []

er 2.57 changes all that. No longer are simple features 'non discoverable.' It has more or less a completely redesigned user interface that is clean, sensible and newbie friendly (hey, I'm using it!). It has a h

Appeal to law. []

handy tab interface for Actions/Properties such as Render, Scene, World and Object etc. Plus, it's fast and CPU friendly. I'm running the official Blender s

Red herring. []

standalone binary on Fedora 14, with 2GB RAM , Radeon X1300 (free drivers) and a cheap CPU Intel duel e2200. No more more slow GUI, no more

Straw man. []

100% unexplained CPU, just great stuff. Kudos to all who made this possible." "It seems that APNIC has just released the last block of IPv4 addresses and are n

Appeal to popularity. []

now completely out, a lot faster then expected. Even though APNIC received 3 /8 blocks in February the high growth of mobile devices made the addresses run

False dilemma. []

n out even before the summer. 'From this day onwards, IPv6 is mandatory for building new Internet networks and services,' says APNIC Director General Paul Wilson."

Appeal to hypocrisy. []

Re:Victimless "crime" (2)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833050)

what are you on?

Re:Victimless "crime" (1)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833096)

what are you on?

The wrong thread. I think he wanted this thread [] .

Punching, not poking (2)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833130)

I thought that a victimless crime was when you punch people in the dark [] , not when you poke them.

Re:Victimless "crime" (4, Insightful)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833156)

I'm just glad to hear that all of the crimes against victims have been solved and the perpetrators brought to justice, giving the DOJ time to focus on victimless "crimes" like online poker.

At least I assume that's what happened.

I could also be about the $3 Billion [] in civil penalties they are going after. From the link:

Prosecutors also filed civil charges against the poker companies and several individual "payment processors," seeking at least $3 billion in penalties.

Re:Victimless "crime" (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833162)

eh, my thinking was:

Doesn't the DOJ have better things to do than make themselves look like morons by trying to seize even more domains? Or did they forget that seizing domains essentially does nothing? []

Re:Victimless "crime" (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833410)

I'm just glad to hear that all of the crimes against victims have been solved and the perpetrators brought to justice, giving the DOJ time to focus on victimless "crimes" like online poker.

At least I assume that's what happened.

Well, they did finally convict that notorious master criminal Barry Bonds (of acting like an a**, if nothing else.)

Have you ever knowingly used performance enhancing drugs while playing online poker?

Fed up (1, Troll)

darjen (879890) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832904)

These government assholes can go fsck themselves. America is screwed. Free country my ass.

Re:Fed up (2, Insightful)

IgnoramusMaximus (692000) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832980)

These government assholes can go fsck themselves. America is screwed. Free country my ass.

Particularly obnoxious here is the stench of utter corruption and duplicity when it comes to US government and gambling: you see gambling is eeeevil ..... unless its the US or State governments who run the casinos, or their anointed cronies, in which case its just an innocent, family past-time ...

Re:Fed up (4, Interesting)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833030)

These online sites had no regulation. They could have just stacked the deck with a computer algorithm every time, or had house players cooperating with eachother at the table. My brother use to play these sites and he said many times there would be teams of players that all knew eachothers cards. It makes it a lot easier to find out what the other opponents have and bet accordingly with unfair advantage. They presumably split the winnings.

Re:Fed up (4, Insightful)

geek (5680) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833060)

So don't play? It's not rocket science.

Re:Fed up (1)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833114)

The point of regulation is to make sure that the gambling is fair. Otherwise you have a shit load of cheaters. I don't gamble, so I agree with you. But some people want to do that, and want to make sure the places they gamble have some impartial oversight.

Re:Fed up (2)

geek (5680) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833186)

You would be hard pressed to find anything in life "fair" let alone something as inherently corrupt as "gambling" By all means though, continue beating the drum and giving your money away to people for no reason at all. If you think Vegas or any casino is "fair" you clearly don't know what gambling is.

Re:Fed up (2)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833324)

I just got through saying I don't gamble, so I agree that "I should just not gamble". I have a better understanding of odds than most people and it simply isn't worth it. That being said, my dad makes a lot of money playing REAL poker. Ive seen him come home with thousands of dollars at a time every saturday when I was a kid. Texas hold'em at the table is lucrative if you can read people well and also have an understanding of probability. He used to run a poker table and made a lot of money that way as well. At one point he went into business with a corrupt piece of shit that was doing some illegal gambling on the side and the Montana Gaming Commission busted them with handguns and handcuffed him and my father. The reason I know my dad wasnt involved is because hes a very honest man. It wasn't a misdemeanor or a felony, but they penalized him by not allowing a him to have a license to run a table for 5 years.

Re:Fed up (4, Insightful)

gknoy (899301) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833330)

It's entirely possible to imagine a fair gambling establishment, or of playing with a group of players where no one was cheating. The fact that many WOULD cheat doesn't mean that it's impossible not to.

Many gambling games (slots, etc) are stacked in the house's favor, yes. Poker, though, is a game of skill (with some random factors) between players, where the house takes a cut of the pot. A fair gambling establishment would ensure that no player was cheating the other players, and that the dealer was not favoring anyone. It would be like having professional Magic the Gathering leagues that play for big money: fairness is both possible and desired, but some people will always want to try to cheat. Good establishments will try to minimize that.

Re:Fed up (1)

TFAFalcon (1839122) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833214)

'Fair'? The casino can claim that a machine malfunctioned after you win a jackpot, and you call that fair?

Re:Fed up (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833240)

And how exactly do you expect one country's government to oversee and regulate an activity going on in another country? You don't. So if you want some "impartial oversight" in your gambling, then do it in a country where you believe the government to be doing its job there. If you're going to a gambling website located in Zimbabwe or Nigeria, and lose, then you got what you deserve.

Besides, even with all that vaunted "oversight", the odds are overwhelming that you're going to lose if you travel in person to Las Vegas. Gambling is just a way to separate fools from their money, and for other people (who know what they're getting into) to have a little entertainment with a tiny, tiny possibility of making a lot of money in the process.

Re:Fed up (0)

IgnoramusMaximus (692000) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833252)

But some people want to do that, and want to make sure the places they gamble have some impartial oversight.

Why? You still did not explain that part. If you regulate gambling, (not to be "fair" for it never is, the "house" always wins in all the "regulated" casinos - so you can quit that bullshit line) then you must regulate all games of skill or chance. After all one can bet on any event, and so, in your government-nanny-to-the-rescue (with bonus side revenue opportunities) model, we should have the somber FBI men check out playgrounds and inspect playing cards in every family dwelling for marks, lest evils of unfair gambling be the downfall of the civilization as we know it!

Re:Fed up (1)

vldragon (981127) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833292)

These sites arn't hosted in the US so the US wouldn't be able to regulate them anyway. The DOJ is pissed because they are accespting money from US citizens. Normall this money is blocked but the've used some "unique" ways to route arounnd those blocks. They may have broken US law but seeing as how there not in the US I don't see how it matter or that the DOJ has a leg to stand on. If they want to go after someone they will have to go after the poeple gambling... Though hopefully they see the problems with that and won't do it.

Re:Fed up (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833564)

Gambling by definition is unfair. The house will always come out ahead. Period. PERIOD! At that point, you're only splitting hairs with regulation as to what is and isn't fair. I go so far as to say that being "regulated" = buying off the Feds (basically a bigger mafia above them) enough to keep them from looking their way as they continue to game the system.

My advice, only gamble if your in it for the good times. If you earn any money, run away ASAP. If you don't, consider the loss a cost of consuming entertainment. But above all, it's best to accept the premise that you will get financially fucked no matter where you gamble at. Be it in Vegas or online.

Re:Fed up (1)

dcollins (135727) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833386)

You say that as though people were rational actors.

Re:Fed up (1)

pclminion (145572) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833398)

So don't play? It's not rocket science.

That would be the answer, except that some people become psychologically addicted to playing these games and in a very real sense can't just "walk away." You can stand around saying they're stupid for getting themselves into that situation in the first place, but they are in that situation regardless, and now are being preyed upon. Maybe for you it's okay to prey upon people if they made a stupid decision and are now addicted to gambling, but to me that seems uncivilized. Let them throw their money away if they wish, but how about we try to make sure that the rules they think they are playing by are actually the rules they are playing by.

Re:Fed up (0)

IgnoramusMaximus (692000) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833138)

These online sites had no regulation.

.... and they also have mean bet size of $.05 at their tables. The ones that actually use real money that is. Vast majority of players on sites like Poker Stars use fake, in-house, "play money". No real world value of any kind.

If people are to gamble with real money, it is their (not government's) responsibility to make sure the casino is not crooked. After all gambling is for fools who have money to burn in the first place and not some essential like food or shelter.

Your attitude is the classic example of extreme "government nannyism". If casinos are to be regulated by government, so should kindergarten soccer matches. After all mothers could gamble on their kid's performance and just think of all the deal making and cheating possible!

Re:Fed up (2)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833248)

If some private certifying organization were to replace the government in that role then sure. However a lot of states use a "Gaming Commission" as a way to enforce gambling laws because its a part of tax revenue. They also serve the purpose of making gambling fair (within set tolerances). Whats wrong with using government to make sure that casinos are fair if your state does a lot of gambling and gets tax revenue from it? Its not nannyism, its paying your government for a service you want them to provide and bringing in more money to the state from gambling tourists. Las Vegas and Nevada did quite well for a long time doing this.

Re:Fed up (1)

IgnoramusMaximus (692000) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833458)

The key words here being "tax revenue". The governments do not give a flying fuck about "fairness" of gambling. Commercial gambling being "fair" is one of the most ridiculous concepts I ever heard of and its only useful fools like you who believe such nonsense. The government's only concerns are financial: that is to prevent any activity that does not feed their coffers.

Gambling is a particularly painful thorn because it involves a large number of very small cash transactions without receipts and thus it allows for casino operators to avoid onerous taxation. Governments also see gambling in general as a form of taxation on the arithmetically challenged and so see any private operators as direct competition for easy money.

Those are the true reason why governments of all stripe attack any gambling enterprises as viciously as major drug cartels.

Idiots like you are just useful tools in this campaign of ever expanding governmental reach and sating its ever growing hunger for money and resources.

And as to asking for "services" to regulate gambling, it is the same dynamics as "asking" for all these "think of the children" and "terrorists under every bed" gleefully psychotic campaigns of terror by the government: the only people who are really asking for such things are the members of government-centered elites, their sycophantic hanger-ons and their associated parasitic police-military-prison complex corporations who stand to profit from this.

Re:Fed up (2)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833154)

One of the companies. involved was caught in a very serious cheating scandal.

Re:Fed up (2)

Samalie (1016193) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833174)

"My brother knew a guy". Really?

[citation needed]

I play regularly with real money on one of the sites. I have seen the improbable happen. There have even been a couple of scandals which all but killed a couple of cardrooms (and said scandals were not comitted by the "house"). There are ways to collude via software...there are ways to collude via telephone. But all the reputable cardrooms all work their asses off to prevent this, because they make a shitton of money off the rake, and they don't want their users jumping ship to another cardroom.

These rooms ARE regulated...just not by the almighty US Government.

Or to better phrase...the US Government isn't getting a cut, so they're shutting them down.

And seriously, how in the FUCK does the US Government have the right to sieze domain names OUTSIDE of the fucking USA? Pigfuckers have now tied up $500 of MY money that is in a site, and its NOT fucking illegal for me to play (I'm in Canada). Seriously, USA...go fuck yourself.

Re:Fed up (1)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832982)

Well, these guys broke the law. The decided to do fraudulent transactions that disguised "money for the purpose of gambling" as "money for X goods". That is a clear case of fraud. The money laundering part is probably the fact that they created other companies that they paid for some service with the illegitimate money, and this money was actually going into other bank accounts they had access to. There is a distinction in US law. You don't like current gambling laws? Lobby to change it.

Re:Fed up (1, Informative)

darjen (879890) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833028)

The only reason for the fraud in the first place is because of the government's other laws. In other words, they would have been fine if it was legal for credit card companies and banks to do business with the sites. Don't try to excuse the government's actions here by claiming they "broke the law".

Re:Fed up (3, Interesting)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833140)

Its still fraud. Whether or not online gambling should be legal, they still lied to banks, and created shell companies to launder illegally obtained money. No doubt they knew this day would come someday and have secret accounts overseas. I don't feel sorry for them.

Re:Fed up (1)

MonkWB (724056) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833524)

The argument is that this is not "money for the purpose of gambling." These are poker sights, the argument is that this is "money for a game of skill."

Re:Fed up (1)

i kan reed (749298) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832998)

Free country with purchase of politician. Please see Citizen's United for offer details and limitations.

Re:Fed up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833568)

we could get reza lockwood to go sit on them, since she weighs about 800 hundred pounds. then they would be unable to regulate tilt poker dot net because she would be squishing them

Hmm (2)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832916)

I didn't realize online poker was illegal. However, the other things they were pulling is pretty bad.

Re:Hmm (3, Informative)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832948)

As far as I can tell from TFA the "other things they were pulling" were workarounds to the fact that online gambling is illegal. ie, they lied to banks about the nature of their business, thus the charge of "fraud".

Re:Hmm (2)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833086)

Yeah. I just didn't realize online gambling was illegal. Coming from Montana, there is a casino attached to almost every gas station, and then a bunch of bigger self-contained restaurant casinos. You could perhaps understand my naivety since its literally everywhere where I am from.

Re:Hmm (4, Insightful)

MLease (652529) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833262)

Well, that's why online gambling is illegal. The guys behind those casinos don't want the competition, and have paid their lackeys in Congress to keep them off the playing field.


Re:Hmm (1)

Fynnsky (1238708) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833238)

I'm too lazy to RTFA, but assuming they didn't use fake names, didn't the banks realize that "POKER STARS" was a gambling website? While you're at it, can I have an account for my "" and "" websites?

Re:Hmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35832964)

Its only illegal for non-US gambling sites. Its a clear violation of WTO rules but being the only superpower/bully left, the US doesn't care.

Re:Hmm (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832968)

Online poker and other forms of online gambling are illegal in the US. The money laundering and bank fraud offences relate to collecting the gambling stakes from punters wishing to play the games.

Re:Hmm (1)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833056)

Laundering and fraud are also from disguising purchases as other things. I.e. 100 dollars to a "golf company" that actually goes into your gambling account.

Re:Hmm (2)

NetShadow (132017) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833104)

Online poker where the server is run outside the United States, does *not* appear to be illegal in the US. At least the wire act used to prosecute people sending money to sports books and the like does not appear to apply to poker specifically, nor has anyone in the US been successfully prosecuted for online poker. What *is* illegal as of the recent UIGEA act is for banks to provide you the ability to send your money to / receive money from these online gaming sites. Regardless of the facts, many state and federal officials persist in calling online poker illegal, despite it not apparently breaking any laws.

Re:Hmm (1)

Antisyzygy (1495469) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833194)

So then really they are committing fraud and money laundering, not so much the fact that their business is illegal. Thanks.

Re:Hmm (1)

Nick_13ro (1099641) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833584)

So then really they are committing fraud and money laundering, not so much the fact that their business is illegal. Thanks.

Umm, nope. It's more like the government one morning covering all the sidewalks with sharp spikes and then arresting anybody that avoids the spikes the only way left available- the road, for jaywalking or for blocking traffic.

This Is Not About Censorship (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35832940)

Why the fuck is this story listed under "Censorship"?? The internet domain seizure is but a small piece of a huge case the Feds are bringing, and it has nothing do with censorship at all.

Its all a part of charging these sites with bank fraud, money laundering, and illegal gambling offenses.

As usual Slashdot gets the story completely wrong.

Re:This Is Not About Censorship (1)

cosm (1072588) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833142)

I would venture to say it is censorshipbecause these sites have to operate this way because if they explicitly stated they are gambling business, they would be turned away at the banks. Whilst the laws being broken are not directly related to gambling, they are being broken because Americans politicians want to censor the idea of gambling from the national conscience. Wasn't Capone brought in for tax evasion? They use whatever law is on the books, but the those subsidiary laws are broken as a symptom of a greater underlying law. IE Prohibition and all that jazz. If these gambling sites are rigged or are really just straight stealing money without offering real odds and certified RNGs, then I see your point, otherwise I see it as censorship.

Re:This Is Not About Censorship (5, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833348)

Amendment V to the United States Constitution

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Explain to me how a Government body can seize your private property when you have not even been charged with a crime yet, much less convicted. In the case of these businesses, the seizure is likely costing them millions of dollars in revenue. Their guilt is obvious but if the government can shut down your entire business by simply filing an indictment, which is not even an accusation until a grand jury reviews it, that is without a doubt censorship.

What if the the justice department files an indictment against a major candidate for president for election fraud and shuts down his website in the middle of an election? What they can do to the unsavory, they can do to us all.

Re:This Is Not About Censorship (1)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833436)

because there isn't a "suppressing major campaign donor's competition" section?

Saving The World (4, Funny)

cosm (1072588) | more than 3 years ago | (#35832962)

Yes! Go Department of Justice! The world is now safe! Keep nannying us please! I can't control my gambling habit, so you doing it for me solves the problem! Oh, things like state-run-lotteries, white-collar gambling on stock market derivatives and other ill-formulated market bundles, that is all well and good. But those evil-online-poker sites, they are causing the downfall of the US! Just like the millions spent on the Barry Bonds trial! All the victims of gambling and steroid use in baseball now can see that justice be served! The file-shares, go get them too! Litigate Litigate Litigate! You are the bastion of liberty in the free-world, 'O DoJ, I salute your valiant efforts at keeping us all safe.

Fucking Assholes.

Re:Saving The World (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833222)

Thanks for posting that. It demonstrates perfectly why so many people regard this site, despite its often high-quality content, as a crowd of people acting like a party of 14-year holds who've managed to get someone to buy them bottles of vodka.

If your comment really illustrates how you view the world, then I feel sorry for anyone you live or work with.

Re:Saving The World (1)

imric (6240) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833334)

My YOU have a high opinion of your own stuffed shirt, don't you?

Re:Saving The World (2)

gpuk (712102) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833404)

How so? A lot of his points seem valid to me.

I particularly liked: "white-collar gambling on stock market derivatives" - the SEC has done a fucking piss poor job of regulating Wall Street over the last decade or so, laying the path for Madoff and friends to take some of the biggest gambles and pull off some of the largest frauds in corporate history. If that's government regulation at work, I'll take my chances with the self-regulation of the online poker world.

They can never win a battele against the web. (-1, Troll)

dotcomma (2042416) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833010)

They tried once to shut down [] a site that was pirating online sports. So did that help?


MikeB0Lton (962403) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833084)

goatse troll warning...

This seems better... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833020)

...than taking URL's based on some ass hat's accusation that someone associated with the site is posting copyrighted materials at that URL.... I'm just saying

What's going to be their new TLD? (1)

tacokill (531275) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833042)

Wouldn't it be easy for them to get a new top level domain? Where is or or I didn't look very hard so they may have already done this.

I suppose it's obvious that these domain seizures are nothing more than a minor speedbump and and really only specific to TLD's managed in the US. Thankfully, there are countless TLDs that are not US based so choices are aplenty.

I wish they took bets on how quickly they will be back....

Re:What's going to be their new TLD? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833160)

I wish they took bets on how quickly they will be back....

They probably would have, but, there was no place to post the bet... chicken/egg

Re:What's going to be their new TLD? (1)

bfree (113420) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833516)

In the meantime you can just edit your hosts file:

Amazingly neither nor their blog site [] have any news about this yet.

My ISPs dns servers are already dishing out the hijacked IPs for the other two domains ( but I'm sure someone here can find the old IP addresses.

As for betting when they will be back, you want a regular bookie for that (not a poker site), perhaps betfair [] or Paddy Power [] . Notice I gave the links to their sites on their home nations TLD despite the fact that both currently redirect them to .com.

Does anyone have a link to the indictment itself? (1)

AEton (654737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833044)

The Slashdot article links to a press release about the indictment (, not the indictment itself.

In understanding legal issues, I am all about "reading the source code". Has anyone found a copy of the actual indictment itself that lists all the details about what these folks are being charged with?

Even better would be a link to the criminal complaint which I assume preceded the indictment. Those things are usually dozens of pages long, full of fascinating, juicy facts, and end up being filtered by the news media into reports that sometimes skip some of the cool details you can see yourself if you "read the source code" of the complaint. I'd be eager to see this, but so far none of the news sources reporting on the issue have disclosed it.

Re:Does anyone have a link to the indictment itsel (4, Informative)

AEton (654737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833490)

OK, I did some digging in PACER, where it looks like the documents have probably been filed but are probably still sealed.

The relevant case is in the Southern District of New York ( - anyone can sign up for a PACER account, they're free but you pay 8 cents per page, and if you charge less than $10 in a quarter it's free).

They're using an existing case, 1:10-cr-00336-LAK, which is all about the arrest and indictment of a gambling payment processor dude a year ago in April 2010.

See [] for more on the dude.

So the timeline is:
1) Gambling dude is arrested in 2010 and charged with some gambling-related crimes. See his indictment at []
2) Some time recently, he is (according to an Australian newspaper) secretly released from prison and prosecutors have not said whether he's still being charged
3) These 11 people are all being charged with 9 new crimes (documents not yet available, but apparently they'll be stored in this place / as part of this case number)

There have been a bunch of sealed documents added to the case recently; maybe they include the complaint and indictment that the press release talks about. You can see the history I got from PACER at [] .

lobbying and online poker (4, Insightful)

BigHungryJoe (737554) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833080)

The online poker industry is young yet and has not had time to establish a strong lobby in Washington, DC. Once they do, it will become a respectable, job-creating industry run by innovators that make this economy strong... and these sorts of stories will disappear.

Re:lobbying and online poker (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833182)

Probably won't make any jobs here - much cheaper to pay 10 dudes in China to make your Poker application.

Re:lobbying and online poker (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833342)

Once they do [establish a strong lobby]...

...they will resume cleaning out little old ladies on a much larger scale, and malcontents like you will complain about the corporations that make up the online poker industry.

great, now where will the poker players play? (1)

Nyder (754090) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833094)

Now they are going to be without a place to play, and might actually do something constructive with their lives.

Wait? What? There's more online poker games for them to go play?

Great work again, Gov. I see my tax money is being used responsibly, mainly in this time of buget cuts.

Stupid twats.

Re:great, now where will the poker players play? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833558)

They didn't get all their domain names

The 2011 WSOP, live from Leninworth Penitentary! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833108)

Daniel Negreanu just went all in with 2 cartons of Marlboros, a carton of Camels, 4 packs of 305's and his bitch, Mike Matusow.

still open (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833134)

my "friend" is playing on poker stars right now...they are not closed yet.

fulltiltpoker? (1)

siegfri3d (1167755) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833150) works for me. However, and are all 0wn3d by the FBI. Does it mean fulltiltpoker

Re:fulltiltpoker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833230) and are all still in tact here. however is seized.

Re:fulltiltpoker? (1)

siegfri3d (1167755) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833350)

Nevermind i think it's only my DNS not being refreshed quickly enough. All 4 domains are blocked!! I'm really curious to know the full list of blocked domains.

Re:fulltiltpoker? (1)

siegfri3d (1167755) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833234)

Grr posted too quicky. Does it mean somehow got access to the DNS back? Any information on how they block them exactly? The last time when they blocked they took ownership of the email on the whois to change the DNS. It doesn't seem they change whois data. So they may have made a mistake with

Re:fulltiltpoker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833366) is now offline, but is still functioning. I believe the .com address was a cash play environment and the .net address for tournaments and free play (play money). If this is the case then FullTilt was pretty smart to bifurcate the functionality/business lines this way.

Re:fulltiltpoker? (1)

stonedcat (80201) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833368)

I wonder if the MafiaaFire Redirector addon will be updated for these sites or not.

And end to poker spam as we know it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833152)

Or am I being too optimistic?

Washington D.C. Legalizes Gambling (2)

lothos (10657) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833172) []

"Washington, D.C., with its under 1 million population, has become the first jurisdiction in the United States to legalize online gambling.

The District of Columbia is looking to raise millions of dollars from a multi-billion dollar industry that, until now, has operated exclusively offshore from the United States. That apparently is about to change."

"Players are really loyal in this industry," Ifrah said. "You really have to ask yourself what is the incentive a player is going to have to leave a trusted site with global competition to play in a site that's untested and kind of unknown and doesn't offer you the same level of play."

Looks to me like they just want to get rid of the competition.

It is all about money... US not getting its share (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833188)

Of course, the lawyers could learn how to play poker and win, then give the money to the US treasury.

I happened to be on PokerStars when the news broke. I was able to continue to play, but then I signed off and I couldn't get back in. There are going to be millions of US poker players who are going to be highly pissed off. Especially, if they can't get their deposits back.

This is ridiculous (2)

gpuk (712102) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833242)

This domain seizure trend is getting out of hand. If the FBI, ICE and DOJ keep this up, it's going to finish with the UN administering the root servers.

I'm a paying, European customer of Full Tilt Poker... I hope this domain seizure doesn't interfere with FTPs non-US operations. What jurisdiction do they have to decide whether or not I can exercise my legal right to engage in an online card game for money?

I noticed that the forums are still up: []

Re:This is ridiculous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833630)

This domain seizure trend is getting out of hand. If the FBI, ICE and DOJ keep this up, it's going to finish with the UN administering the root servers.

That won't be any better - the problem isn't who controls the DNS, its centralized control itself that is the failure point. Where it needs to end up is some sort of distributed "web of trust" domain system which can't be easily censored. It will mean name resolution won't be 100% consistent for all users, but seizures and the games that ICANN and WIPO play where the people with the most expensive lawyers get to say who owns what domain means we aren't necessarily that consistent today either.

B.S. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833244)

This has nothing to do with the law its 100% about siphoning money to the government. Take from the rich and give to the richer its a revers robin hood that's all that American government is about these days.

Barf (1)

FallinWithStyle (1474217) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833246)

“These defendants, knowing full well that their business with U.S. customers and U.S. banks was illegal, tried to stack the deck,” said Janice Fedarcyk, assistant director-in-charge at the FBI. “The defendants bet the house that they could continue their scheme, and they lost."

Did anyone else almost throw up when they read this?

Illegal Gambling! Duh! (2)

XiaoMing (1574363) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833280)

The statement on the site warns that taking part in an illegal gambling business is a federal crime. “It is also a federal crime to knowingly accept, in connection with the participation of another person in unlawful Internet gambling, credit, electronic fund transfers, or checks," the warning said.

Yeah! Don't these idiots know that this type of risky gambling behavior is only allowed for people's life savings and investments, and only to be done so by giant financial corporations who knowingly deceive the general public?!

According to the indictment, the offshore poker companies continued to operate in the U.S. despite...

And these guys are OFFSHORE and operating in our beloved US?!?! What kind of blatant hypocrisy is this. I miss the good old days of [right now] when home-grown companies like GE funnel the money they've earned to off-shore accounts and pay zero dollars in taxes on the money they made off of the American people with full support from the government. Who do these hypocritical poker bastards think they are!

You've gotta spend money to not make money (1) (245670) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833304)

Instead of spending all this money to stamp out online poker, why won't they regulate and tax it? This demonizing makes absolutely no sense. Especially when our country's not exactly flush with cash. The way our government spends money to eliminate the possibility of making money continues to amaze me.

Re:You've gotta spend money to not make money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833518)

You misunderstand, the US has a strong, local gambling industry, just think of all the horse and dog tracks around the nation. Each little locality has something that they allow (state lottery, track or sports betting, casinos, etc.). The individual states don't want to compete with offshore stuff that doesn't have to pay for massive complexes, pay as many employees, or pay US level of taxes much like Best Buy would rather not compete with

What about customer's money now (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833318)

Real nice now shut them down so that all the people that have money on those sites really have no way to get it back now.... smart!

Online poker may not be illegal, sending money is (5, Interesting)

NetShadow (132017) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833336)

Online poker where the server is run outside the United States, may not be illegal in the US. At least the wire act used to prosecute people sending money to sports books and the like does not appear to apply to poker specifically, nor has anyone in the US been successfully prosecuted for online poker.

What *is* illegal as of the recent UIGEA act is for banks to provide you the ability to send your money to / receive money from these online gaming sites. Regardless of the facts, many state and federal officials persist in calling online poker illegal, despite it not apparently breaking any laws.

See this quote:

The indictment sets up a complicated global legal battle between the Department of Justice and the online poker entrepreneurs who have long argued that their operations in the U.S. do not violate U.S. law. Indeed, in recent days, one of the nation’s most prominent casino billionaires, Steve Wynn, announced a strategic relationship with PokerStars and said “in the United States of America the Justice Department has an opinion but several states have ruled and courts have agreed that poker is a game of skill, it’s not gambling. PokerStars rests their argument on that.”

New law passed, coincidence? (1)

CrazyJim1 (809850) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833500)

DC 1rst place for online gambling! April 12th []

This seems to be a many pronged approach. 1) The government loves to interfere with your life to give you the idea that you're being controlled, not them.
2) The government is going to make online gambling taxable, and wants no competition.
3) The government will seize all the cashouts for the next few months like they did in 2009 for extra money.

(The following is a joke, don't get upset), Obama must be tired of making spending cuts so he needs to take poker player's money :P

From what I can tell the law in 2009 said,"You can't deposit money", but I had my money on the site before 2009, I'm a winning poker player and as such I never have to deposit. I turned $1.20 into $1,300. If the US was smart, they'd let profitable poker players still play because we can bring in more money and buy more goods which helps the state's sales taxes.

This is only temporary (1)

pwthoma (187561) | more than 3 years ago | (#35833600)

All someone has to do to get around this is get the IP address for the website and add it to their hosts file.

All the provider (casino) needs to do to get around this and prevent it in the future is to register domains in other countries. I'm sure that's what they will do and then email all their customers. They can also build this into their clients if they don't use a web interface.

Not that hard....


Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35833602)

I'm in Canada. Are these all US sites even? I gamble with an account in Great Britain (it makes me), what right does the USA have to seize domains? What a crock of shit.
    Exactly like someone else said, give them some fucking lobby in Washington to grease some loud mouths and this would never happen.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?