Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006

[soflat]

I'm pretty sure the banking lobby had a hand in developing the bill so it won't be too much of a burden and they won't have to identify each company processing gambling transactions individually.

Presumably, there will be a central database of processors to block, which will be compiled and updated by either the government or a private entity, then it is just plugged into the system and everything is blocked automatically.

The only catch is when people start calling and asking for legitimate transactions to be allowed to pass through the security. That might take some manpower initially.

 

[lots0]

Read section 5364 (a) of the Bill, located on page 231.

This section lays it all out and puts the enforcement burden on the Banks.

I am not going to post the bill my free copy of adobe will not allow me copy and paste and I aint going to pay adobe just so I can copy and paste, I despise adobe.

 

[lots0]

I'm pretty sure the banking lobby had a hand in developing the bill

If you have any evidence of that I would love to see it, got a link?

All the information I have is that the Banking Lobby had no more idea of this bills passage than we did.

>>> I don't think Bush starting another war is going to win him any elections or improve his poll numbers, it may get him impeached though, after this next election.

 

[Rollo]

No transcripts, the speech I heard was for a fund raiser in 2001 behind closed doors

You gave me a grilling for using the term "secretly" based on this? Dude...

I am not going to post the bill my free copy of adobe will not allow me copy and paste and I aint going to pay adobe just so I can copy and paste, I despise adobe.

How about typing us a few lines? Adobe can't charge you for using your fingers.

Ok, I'm the one getting smart now...

This section lays it all out and puts the enforcement burden on the Banks.

Enforcement seems to mean blocking transactions, this section doesn't say anything about banks being required to police (i.e. research and identify gambling operators). Based on my read, that is something that the Federal Reserve and the Attrorney General have 270 days to work out how to do. Anyone have a second opinion?

Anyway, I'd really like to believe it since you sound pretty certian and I'm always open to being totally wrong about any given subject at any given moment, but what you've come up with so far is what I'd call, um, not too convincing. Got anything else to fill out the billion dollar banking cost/policing theory?

By the way, what did Bush say about online gambling at the 2001 fundraiser?

 

[lots0]

How about typing us a few lines?

Are you nuts? Typing is sooo 1999...

You gave me a grilling for using the term "secretly" based on this? Dude...

I don't think I gave you a 'grilling' (not really sure what that means), if you think I did, Im sorry.

If I sounded a little harsh, I apologize, there is so much bull shit and rumor being said about this Bill I can't believe it, I have never seen anything like this in my life.

See, I have several dogs in this fight, so I hired a team of real lawyers, to look things over, cost me a bundle. I am not going to tell you what they said, but...

I am personally NOT going to close or move my affiliate sites out of the US. My sites are going to stay up inside the US until they come kick in my door and drag me off to prison. If the government won't let me make a living, I guess they can support and feed me.

I refuse to be cowed by all the rumors and bull shit floating around.

I have made what I consider to be a lot of money with online gambling and unlike others I am not going to give up ten years of work without a fight. For me this is not just an abstract discussion.

what did Bush say about online gambling at the 2001 fund raiser?

It was several years ago, so I don't remember word for word, but his entire speech was about his support of 'Family Values'.

BTW Rollo, I get the feeling you are a little right leaning yourself. Maybe you should ask yourself why I was invited to a Republican closed door fund raiser and I still get invitations to the same closed door speeches and fund raisers all the time...

 

[SlotsWizard]

Here is that section (I inserted periods to indent the text similar to the actual bill):

5364. Policies and procedures to identify and prevent restricted transactions

(a) REGULATIONS.Before the end of the 270-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this subchapter, the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, in consultation with the Attorney General, shall prescribe regulations (which the Secretary and the Board jointly determine to be appropriate) requiring each designated payment system, and all participants therein, to identify and block or otherwise prevent or prohibit restricted transactions through the establishment of policies and procedures reasonably designed to identify and block or otherwise prevent or prohibit the acceptance of restricted transactions in any of the following ways:

...(1) The establishment of policies and procedures that

......(A) allow the payment system and any person involved
...... in the payment system to identify restricted transactions
...... by means of codes in authorization messages or by other means; and

......(B) block restricted transactions identified as a result of
...... the policies and procedures developed pursuant to subparagraph (A).

...(2) The establishment of policies and procedures that prevent or
... prohibit the acceptance of the products or services of the
... payment system in connection with a restricted transaction.

 

[Mousey]

requiring each designated payment system, and all participants therein, to identify and block or otherwise prevent or prohibit restricted transactions through the establishment of policies and procedures reasonably designed to identify and block or otherwise prevent or prohibit the acceptance of restricted transactions in any of the following ways:

...(1) The establishment of policies and procedures that—

......(A) allow the payment system and any person involved
...... in the payment system to identify restricted transactions
...... by means of codes in authorization messages or by other means; and

......(B) block restricted transactions identified as a result of
...... the policies and procedures developed pursuant to subparagraph (A).

Highlighted above are sections that get my back up... What "other means" ???

...(2) The establishment of policies and procedures that prevent or
... prohibit the acceptance of the products or services of the
... payment system in connection with a restricted transaction.

What does this mean?? It reads sort of weird to me. Players can't 'accept' products or services? (Like a withdrawal?) Or payment systems (NETeller) can't ? Or the casinos can't? Or the banks can't?

Hell... I'm sorry... The more I read this thing the less sense it makes.

I need coffee and valium...

 

[dominique]

Hell... I'm sorry... The more I read this thing the less sense it makes.

I need coffee and valium...

Me too.

It's too early to wrap my head around that.

 

[Westland Bowl]

What does this mean?? It reads sort of weird to me. Players can't 'accept' products or services? (Like a withdrawal?) Or payment systems (NETeller) can't ? Or the casinos can't? Or the banks can't?

Hell... I'm sorry... The more I read this thing the less sense it makes.

I need coffee and valium...

As typical of legal and government wording, some stuff is not meant to be clear to the average person on the street. (Not that you are just an "average" person....or mouse.)

...(2) The establishment of policies and procedures that prevent or
... prohibit the acceptance of the products or services of the
... payment system in connection with a restricted transaction

Ok, in this case "restricted transaction" is "a online bet" or "online casino" or "funding a casino account"...along those lines. Actually, elsewhere in the bill it's supposed to define what "restricted transaction" means.

The banks, credit card companies, etc must have or must develop some established (written) policies and procedures to prohibit (block) and reject any product or service coming from a payment system (Neteller, Firepay, EFT, wire, checks, etc) that is related to online betting or gambling,

Gummmit wording are infamous for run-on sentences.

 

[lots0]

What "other means" ???

In this context I believe it was worded this way so if the Banks came up with a different or ‘better’ system to identify and block transactions than they have written into the law, they would be able to implement this new and better system without having to amend the law.

Section 5362 Definitions section III (3)

(30 Designated Payment System.- The term ‘designated payment system’ means any system utilized by financial transaction provider that the Secretary and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, in consultation with the Attorney General, jointly determine, by regulation or order, could be utilized in connection with, or to facilitate, any restricted transaction.

Now the next question would be; What is a restricted transaction?

Section 5362 Definitions section III (7)

Restricted Transaction.- The term “restricted transaction means any transaction or transmittal involving any credit, funds, instrument, or proceeds described in any paragraph of section 5363 which the recipient is prohibited from accepting under section 5363.

Both of these can be found on pages 220 and 221 of the Bill.

The “restricted transaction” part is where I believe there are a lot of grey areas. There are also a lot of carve outs for Horse Racing, Indian Casinos and Lotteries thrown in there that really confuse things.

 

[Rollo]

Sportingbet caved

Looks like Sportingbet caved into the pressure:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[SlotsWizard]

What does this mean??

I think it means it's time to move to the UK.

 

[Pinababy69]

I think it means it's time to move to the UK.

You don't like Canuck Land?

It's alot closer.

 

[SlotsWizard]

You don't like Canuck Land?

It's alot closer.

Well sure, it is, and no offense here... but the USD is weak enough... let alone the CAD...

As of this writing:

1 USD = 1.135700 CAD / 1 CAD = 0.880514 USD
1 GBP = 1.856790 USD / 1 USD = 0.538561 GBP
1 GBP = 2.108760 CAD / 1 CAD = 0.474210 GBP

 

[Rollo]

A bit of fallout news...

From Focal Click: "Sands of the Caribbean and Omni Casinos are no longer accepting players from the US. Luckily, our RTG casino, 49er Casino, has not banned players from the US if they're able to fund their accounts."

From Vegas Partners: "In the light of the recent US Safe Port Act, we would like to make the following announcement: that we will be continuing business as usual for the time being.

Fortune Affiliates doesn't even seem to have noticed anything as happened. Absolutely nothing from them... they should have gone into poker.

The vultures are circling... I've never got messages from folks wanting to buy my site before. My reaction is a big FU.

If it's illegal to accept US players, fine, I'll play ball by only advertising casinos that comply... but I see no need for anyone to pack it in. It's not illegal for American webmasters to market to say, Canadians. In fact, I'm moving my one lonely gambling site from Arizona to Toronto.

One safe route for Americans is to only place banners of operators that don't accept US players and leave the risky marketing to the rest of the world.

How are my fellow American webmasters planning to deal with things?

 

[SlotsWizard]

How are my fellow American webmasters planning to deal with things?

So far I have been gathering information, and only today started marking which casinos are US-friendly, which ones are somewhat US-friendly (only excluding states that have specific anti-online gaming laws) and those which have abandoned the US altogether.

I already have a mechanism in place that will block as much US traffic as possible, but that line of code is currently commented out right now. When doofus signs the bill I will likely uncomment it.

While I have already cancelled my hosting service, I still have the service for another 21 months (I prepaid 2 years) so I'm not moving it offshore yet. I can't imagine that I would get in trouble by blocking US traffic and marketing to non-US players.

 

[Rollo]

BTW Rollo, I get the feeling you are a little right leaning yourself.

- ha, I voted for Ralph Nader.

I studied political science as an undergrad and have two masters degrees in related fields so I try to keep up even though I haven't lived in the US for years. I can't help looking at things now analyitcally and as something of outsider.

I think that the the GOP has a highly effective political machine and are far more disciplined at election time than Democrats, plus they have what amounts to their own 24 spin machine in Fox. The GOP has a natural majority in the US becuase they all but control the south and western states (during the Dems long reign they held the South until beasically after LBJ's civil rights push and Nixon's subsequent "southern strategy" to capitalize on this which slowly stripped the South away from the Democrats); the GOP are far better at defining the parameters of the political debate... though I think they are going to get a big spanking this November. But I'd argue that's not becuase the Dems are doing well, it's becuase many outside events and many naked self-created failures are really hurting the GOP and they can't rely on their typical values-related wedge issues like gays and guns or call the Dems tax and spend (after their big-spending performance) ... but they (the GOP) generally run a much tighter political ship (I mean that as a pejorative) than the Democrats. It will be tough for the Deomocrats in 2008 under the best of conditions, but that doesn't mean they can't do it. But just as events can sink the GOP, it can bring them back to life as well. At the end of the day, Americans trust the Republicans more when they think they need a bunch of remorseless hard-asses to protect them from some threat real or imagined.

Anwway, way, way, way off topic.

 

[silcnlayc]

Now you know why the Ports Bill attachment by Frist!

U.S. Politics: Current Events

From Kathy Gill,
Data Show Enormity of Terrorism Pork Potential: A federal inspector general has analyzed the nation's database of top terrorist targets. There are more than 77,000 of them up from 160 a few years ago, before the entire exercise morphed into a congressional PORKFEST.

And on that list of national assets are ... 1,305 casinos! ... The list has 234 restaurants... here's more of what the inspector general found passes for "critical infrastructure." An ice-cream parlor. A tackle shop. A flea market. An Amish popcorn factory. Seven hundred mortuaries made the list. Terrorists know no limits if they're planning attacks on our dead people.

Be afraid people...with this government...be very afraid...for if the dead are a target.......is nothing scared????