Optimal to pay US $19.2 mln (Firepay)

RobWin

closed account
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Location
A Vault!
Optimal to pay US $19.2 mln over gambling websites

Fri Oct 30, 2009 4:59pm EDT

* Forfeiture over Internet gambling websites

* Company will not be criminally prosecuted

NEW YORK, Oct 30 (Reuters) - Canada-based Optimal Group Inc (OPMR.O) agreed to pay $19.2 million in criminal proceeds from processing payments for illegal Internet gambling websites between 2004 and 2006, U.S. prosecutors said on Friday.

They said Optimal acknowledged that Internet gambling merchants broke U.S. criminal law by offering gambling in the United States.

"Optimal, operating an electronic wallet called Firepay, processed more than $2 billion worth of illegal gambling transactions.... Continued here
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

____
____
 

jod5413

Is That Better?
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Location
somewhere on the planet
What a bunch of horsechit! I am amazed that this company is so willing to roll over and play dead. Handling transactions was not illegal during that time frame, as far as I can figure.

I just can not understand why they pursue this BS versus going after serious crime. Gawd knows there is enough of that.
 

Roanan

Banned User - abusive flamming - misogynist
Joined
Oct 6, 2009
Location
Langley, BC...in Canada, eh?
Hmmm....let's see....

The New York District Attorney's Office has agreed NOT to press charges if Firepay turns over $19.2 million.

That's called extortion and is a criminal offense. :eek:

Now how does one go about charging the DA? ;)
 
Last edited:

pokeraddict

Webmaster
Joined
Aug 3, 2002
Location
Las Vegas
What a bunch of horsechit! I am amazed that this company is so willing to roll over and play dead. Handling transactions was not illegal during that time frame, as far as I can figure.

I just can not understand why they pursue this BS versus going after serious crime. Gawd knows there is enough of that.

Firepay processed payments for sportsbooks as well. This means they were in violation of the wire act therefor processed illegal gambling payments. Notice how epassporte, a former strictly poker ewallet, has never ran into the same fate. The feds nailed Neteller on the same deal. Process payments for sportsbooks=screwed. Firepay was around well before 2004. They were processing payments for U.S. players at the same time Paypal was doing so. I wonder why 2004 is the start date. Maybe that was when they moved into sports?
 

NASHVEGAS

Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Location
MERS
Firepay processed payments for sportsbooks as well. This means they were in violation of the wire act therefor processed illegal gambling payments. Notice how epassporte, a former strictly poker ewallet, has never ran into the same fate. The feds nailed Neteller on the same deal. Process payments for sportsbooks=screwed. Firepay was around well before 2004. They were processing payments for U.S. players at the same time Paypal was doing so. I wonder why 2004 is the start date. Maybe that was when they moved into sports?
RANDOM THOUGHTS:
1.The information Firepay turned over will be worth a lot more than the $19.2 million settlement.

2.The Wire Act of 1961 ,iirc, sure has been effective although Gore :rolleyes: did not invent the NET until thereafter......As vague et al as UIGEA is, it leaves less gray area than the Wire Act of 1961 pursuant to the NET. Why basically all of the online gaming culprits continue to plea bargain, settle, etc. versus contesting how the Wire Act of 1961 applies to the NET especially in the Appellate Courts is perplexing. Yes, I am well aware it is quite rare to defeat the Government under any circumstance yet still perplexing.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
This is a CANADIAN company, yet fears prosecution enough to turn over this $19.2 Million, even though Firepay is dead.

Rival, on the other hand, seem to have NO fear of prosecution in the US, despite being equally available to the US courts through it's links to Canada, which explain it's odd decision to outright BAN Canadians, yet actively target US players.

I am sure that MONEY is the driving force behind all of this, the deals are being offered so as to MAKE MONEY for the government, rather than COST the government money in extraditing and prosecuting the company directors, and the costs of holding them in custody. If the directors do NOT pay up, they are forever looking over their shoulders for moves to seize them on behalf of the US authorities.
 

K911

Dormant account
Joined
Apr 16, 2009
Location
Canada
U.S. prosecutors said Optimal processed transactions originating from customers in the United States until Oct. 13, 2006, when the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act was signed into law

If the UIGEA was signed into law on that date, why would Optimal be held accountable for gaming proceeds before that date? Wouldn't they be liable if they processed transactions after the date?
 

RobWin

closed account
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Location
A Vault!
If the UIGEA was signed into law on that date, why would Optimal be held accountable for gaming proceeds before that date? Wouldn't they be liable if they processed transactions after the date?

Because according to prosecutors they were in violation of the wire act even previous to the UIGEA signing.
____
____
 
Top