I'd say that it would clearly be in violation. No direct transactions between gambling entities and US-based financial institutions.
Black Friday For Online Gambling
- Thread starter Nolan Dalla
- Start date
I'd say that it would clearly be in violation. No direct transactions between gambling entities and US-based financial institutions.
I'm on the fence.....been using various books for a long time and really dont have anyone that I know of locally to use. this is pretty friggin depressing.
Anyone know the regulations in Canada and other countries?
I have family that lives in toronto (and Germany), my assumption would be I could do this....
send check to brother-in-law... brother-in-law opens neteller and pokerstars account. deposits the money into neteller and then into pokerstars. I play using the account, when I need to cashout, it would go back through him :shrug:
I have family that lives in toronto (and Germany), my assumption would be I could do this....
send check to brother-in-law... brother-in-law opens neteller and pokerstars account. deposits the money into neteller and then into pokerstars. I play using the account, when I need to cashout, it would go back through him :shrug:
I have withdrawn nearly 9,000 dollars since last night from 5 books. I still have about 800 left in 2 of them. Everyone has there own opinion about this etc. But I personally have no faith in anyones words or reasons not too. I was bitten by aces gold years ago for a pretty good chunk, I was not in the sbc debacle as I had emptied that account months before. It is as they say enter at your own risk.
After all it is an illegal activity that we participate in. I for one am no longer a risk taker as I have been in the past. So I will continue to what I have done for years but at a very small risk as in the past. We have turned into Russia overnight. And this is not the only reason, it is one of many.
The feds want to control every aspect of the american people and most sit back and watch it happen everyday. 99% of the population probably has no idea this bill even exist. nor what it is about. which is exactly what the feds want. Robots. legal or illegal once again this is an infringement of your rights. And it happens everyday in this country. Our forefathers would be ashamed of what has happened in our govt. today. It is called control and they are inching closer and closer to having it in the end.
After all it is an illegal activity that we participate in. I for one am no longer a risk taker as I have been in the past. So I will continue to what I have done for years but at a very small risk as in the past. We have turned into Russia overnight. And this is not the only reason, it is one of many.
The feds want to control every aspect of the american people and most sit back and watch it happen everyday. 99% of the population probably has no idea this bill even exist. nor what it is about. which is exactly what the feds want. Robots. legal or illegal once again this is an infringement of your rights. And it happens everyday in this country. Our forefathers would be ashamed of what has happened in our govt. today. It is called control and they are inching closer and closer to having it in the end.
Just a idea
Just a idea
A long time lurker But this BS has me thinking:mj03: would some thing like this work https://www.citizensbank.ca/ Not sure if a can post this link or if im breaking the rules if a am im sorry what do yall think??
Just a idea
A long time lurker But this BS has me thinking:mj03: would some thing like this work https://www.citizensbank.ca/ Not sure if a can post this link or if im breaking the rules if a am im sorry what do yall think??
Did you transfer that to your bank account? If so will that raise a red flag to them as to why you just had a 9k transfer?
Was wondering on how much banks look at before raising the flag on people..
thanks!
does the bill affect companies like matchbook that just facilitate the gambling transaction between two different parties? could that be a way around this?
yes it is all being transferred into my bank accounts. I do not worry about red flags. bring it on is all i can say. i have done it before and never had any reprecussion and i will not worry now either.
My question is this -
Will the laws for each state change if it is passed? Will they try to convict people for doing online gambling ?
Or will this never be a problem - just the money transfer part of it?
Will the laws for each state change if it is passed? Will they try to convict people for doing online gambling ?
Or will this never be a problem - just the money transfer part of it?
This law says nothing about the legality of gambling online. It only addresses the transfer of money to sites that allow gambling.
This strikes me as a MP3 type issue...sure its illegal...you may be able to go after a few and prosecute them to set and example...and 11,000,000,000 will still download music with no ramifications.
The only thing with this is now we are dealing with money in other countries which can get schisty.
The only thing with this is now we are dealing with money in other countries which can get schisty.
Yeah thats good - really one we figure out how to do transfers - this should not be to much of a problem.
thanx Nolan,
IN a semi related BS issue: to anyone who hasnt ever seen THE PANAMA DECEPTION, a doc that won oscar app. 1990, get it (they havent allowed it be shown on TV in USA in last 10 years or so)... It covers GWB#1 and how he looked the other way on things etc, and many other horrific and hypocritic issues ... I got it at a film store and copied it ... shocks me how little avg. american knows what truly went on there; how GWB looked the other way with a certain high level felon and drugs ... myabe i dont have all the facts and glommed much off this doc, but lemme say its fascinating, and why isn't it allowed to be shown again? The Manchurian Candidate even resurfaced ...
sickening with all the BS going on we let Bush Rove et all dictacte this gambling bill ... I hope all that voted for him are happy as he continues to show hes the biggest joke we've ever had in office
IN a semi related BS issue: to anyone who hasnt ever seen THE PANAMA DECEPTION, a doc that won oscar app. 1990, get it (they havent allowed it be shown on TV in USA in last 10 years or so)... It covers GWB#1 and how he looked the other way on things etc, and many other horrific and hypocritic issues ... I got it at a film store and copied it ... shocks me how little avg. american knows what truly went on there; how GWB looked the other way with a certain high level felon and drugs ... myabe i dont have all the facts and glommed much off this doc, but lemme say its fascinating, and why isn't it allowed to be shown again? The Manchurian Candidate even resurfaced ...
sickening with all the BS going on we let Bush Rove et all dictacte this gambling bill ... I hope all that voted for him are happy as he continues to show hes the biggest joke we've ever had in office
Last edited:
From director of sales at BETUS.com...
Brian,
Recent legislation is solely focused on banking regulations for US banks dealing with gaming merchants.
There is no reference to clients of gaming companies and therefore your account will continue business as usual. Should you have any more question please feel free to contact us at 800-620-1905 or simply email again.
Regards,
Ron Devine
Ron Devine
Sales Director
Brian,
Recent legislation is solely focused on banking regulations for US banks dealing with gaming merchants.
There is no reference to clients of gaming companies and therefore your account will continue business as usual. Should you have any more question please feel free to contact us at 800-620-1905 or simply email again.
Regards,
Ron Devine
Ron Devine
Sales Director
Good article
http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/article.cfm?contentID=161472
I. NELSON ROSE
Gambling and the Law?:
The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 Analyzed
? Copyright 2006, all rights reserved worldwide. GAMBLING AND THE LAW? is a registered trademark of Professor I Nelson Rose, www.GAMBLINGANDTHELAW.com.
The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 was rammed through Congress by the Republican leadership in the final minutes before the election period recess. According to Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), no one on the Senate-House Conference Committee had even seen the final language of the bill. The Act is title VIII of a completely unrelated bill, the Safe Port Act, HR 4954, dealing with port security. It can be found on pages 213 -244 of the Conference Report: http://www.saveonlinegaming.com/hr49543.pdf. It is based on the Leach and Goodlatte bills, HR 4411 and HR 4777, but there are some important differences.
The following is a detailed analysis of the Act. The section numbers that follow refer to new sections that have been added to title 31 of the U.S. Code:
?5361 The Act begins with Congress's findings and purpose. These include a recommendation from the discredited National Gambling Impact Study Commission, whose chair was the right-wing, Republican incompetent, Kay Coles James. Findings include the doubtful assertion that Internet gambling is a growing problem for banks and credit card companies. It correctly states that "new mechanisms for enforcing gambling laws on the Internet are necessary," especially cross-border betting.
The Act contains a standard clause that it does not change any other law or Indian compact. It repeats this many times, to make sure that no one can use the Act as a defense to another crime, or to expand existing gambling.
Most importantly, the Department of Justice is arguing before the World Trade Organization, in the dispute between the U.S. and Antigua, that all interstate gambling is illegal under the Wire Act. The DOJ insisted that any Internet prohibition passed by Congress not expressly authorize Internet betting on Horseracing. The DOJ believes this will allow it to continue to argue that the Interstate HorseRacing Act does not do exactly what it says it does, legalize interstate horseracing.
?5362 Definitions.
Bet or wager includes risking something of value on the outcome of a contest, sports event "or a game subject to chance." The Act otherwise allows contestants to risk money on themselves. The "game subject to chance" restriction is designed to eliminate Internet poker.
The Act then confuses the issue of skill by stating that betting includes purchasing an "opportunity" to win a lottery, which must be predominantly subject to chance. Someone will figure out a way to create an opportunity to win, where the opportunity is subject to some chance. But the Act expressly prohibits lotteries based on sports events.
Betting includes instructions or information. This eliminates the argument overseas operators used that the money was already in a foreign country, so no bet took place in the U.S.
The Act exempts activities that we all know are gambling, but are, by statute, declared not to be gambling. These include securities and commodities, including futures, that are traded on U.S. exchanges. Boilerrooms and bucketshops, selling foreign securities are gambling. Insurance is not.
Free games are not gambling. But there is a special provision that allows sites to offer points or credits to players only if these are redeemable only for more games. Operators of free games, where players can win valuable prizes, will have to stop giving points for wins that can be redeemed for cash. Free bingo, on the other hand, can still give small cash prizes paid out of the advertising budget.
Fantasy leagues are legal, but subject to detailed restrictions. A fantasy team cannot be "based on the current membership of an actual team." What they actually mean is a fantasy team cannot be composed merely of the players of a real team. There is no limit on the cost of entering, but prizes must be announced in advance, and not based on the fees paid by participants. Statistics must be derived from more than one play, more than one player, and more than one real-world event.
Being in the "business of betting or wagering" still does not include mere players. It also expressly does not include financial institutions involved in money transfers.
"Designated payment system" is a new term. It could have been labeled simply "target," as in "you are the target of a criminal investigation." It covers any system used by anyone involved in money transfers, that the federal government determines could be used by illegal gambling. The procedure will be that the Secretary of the Treasury, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and Attorney General will meet and create regulations and orders targeting certain money transfer systems.
"Financial transaction provider" is a very broad definition covering everyone who participates in transferring money for illegal Internet gambling. This expressly includes an "operator of a terminal at which an electronic fund transfer may be initiated," and international payment networks. This covers third party providers, like Neteller.
"Interactive computer service" includes Internet service providers.
"Restricted transaction" means any transmittal of money involved with unlawful Internet gambling.
"Unlawful Internet gambling" is defined as betting, receiving or transmitting a bet that is illegal under federal, state or tribal law. The Act says to ignore the intermediary computers and look to the place where the bet is made or received.
This does not completely solve the problem of Internet poker, or even Internet casinos. The Act does not expand the reach of the Wire Act, the main federal statute the DOJ uses against Internet gambling. Although the DOJ has taken the position that the Wire Act covers all forms of gambling, courts have ruled that it is limited to bets on sports events and races. State anti-gambling statutes have similar weaknesses, including the presumption that they do not apply if part of the activity takes place overseas. This new statute requires that the Internet gambling be "unlawful." But it would often be difficult to find a federal, state or tribal law that clearly made a specific Internet bet illegal.
Nevada and other states are expressly permitted to authorize 100% intrastate gambling systems. Congress required that state law and regulations include blocking access to minors and persons outside the state.
Tribes were given the same rights, with the same restrictions. Two tribes can set up an Internet gaming system, if it is authorized by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. This means that tribes can operate bingo games linking bingo halls on reservations. They can also link progressive slot machines, if their tribal-state compacts allow. But they cannot operate Internet lotteries and other games open to the general public.
It is interesting that Congress decreed that states can decide for themselves if they want to have at-home betting on horseracing, but not on dogracing. Congress also decreed that tribes can operate games that link reservations, even across state lines, but not the states themselves: state lotteries are not exempt.
Congress had a little problem with the term "financial institution." To force casinos to report large cash transaction, federal law was changed to define "financial institution" as including large gambling businesses. Congress had to undo that definition, so that in this Act casinos go back to being casinos.
The other definitions are standard or are described above.
?5363 "No person engaged in the business of betting or wagering may knowingly accept" any money transfers in any way from a person participating in unlawful Internet gambling. This includes credit cards, electronic fund transfers, and even paper checks. But it is limited to Internet gambling businesses, not mere players. It also would not cover payment processors, except under a theory of aiding and abetting.
?5364 Federal regulators have 270 days from the date this bill is signed into law to come up with regulations to identify and block money transactions to gambling sites. At this writing, President Bush had not yet signed this bill, but he will. So the regs will go into effect by the beginning of July 2007.
The regs will require everyone connected with a "designated payment system" to i.d. and block all restricted transactions. So all payment processors are suppose to have systems in place to prevent money from going to operators of illegal Internet gambling. The first step will undoubtedly be to take the credit card merchant code 7995 and expand it to all money transfers. Visa created the 7995 classification in 2001 to avoid having its credit cards used for online gambling. The federal government will order banks and all others involved with electronic money transfers to cease sending funds to any Internet operator who has a 7995 credit card merchant code. Any financial institution that follows the regs cannot be sued, even if it wrongfully blocks a legitimate transaction.
The Act allows the federal regulators to exempt transactions where it would be impractical to require identifying and blocking. This obviously applies to paper checks. Banks have no way now of reading who the payee is on paper checks and cannot be expected to go into that business. Banks tried to defeat this bill, not because they cared about patrons' privacy, but because they knew that it would cost them billions of dollars to set up systems to read paper checks.
http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/article.cfm?contentID=161472
I. NELSON ROSE
Gambling and the Law?:
The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 Analyzed
? Copyright 2006, all rights reserved worldwide. GAMBLING AND THE LAW? is a registered trademark of Professor I Nelson Rose, www.GAMBLINGANDTHELAW.com.
The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 was rammed through Congress by the Republican leadership in the final minutes before the election period recess. According to Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), no one on the Senate-House Conference Committee had even seen the final language of the bill. The Act is title VIII of a completely unrelated bill, the Safe Port Act, HR 4954, dealing with port security. It can be found on pages 213 -244 of the Conference Report: http://www.saveonlinegaming.com/hr49543.pdf. It is based on the Leach and Goodlatte bills, HR 4411 and HR 4777, but there are some important differences.
The following is a detailed analysis of the Act. The section numbers that follow refer to new sections that have been added to title 31 of the U.S. Code:
?5361 The Act begins with Congress's findings and purpose. These include a recommendation from the discredited National Gambling Impact Study Commission, whose chair was the right-wing, Republican incompetent, Kay Coles James. Findings include the doubtful assertion that Internet gambling is a growing problem for banks and credit card companies. It correctly states that "new mechanisms for enforcing gambling laws on the Internet are necessary," especially cross-border betting.
The Act contains a standard clause that it does not change any other law or Indian compact. It repeats this many times, to make sure that no one can use the Act as a defense to another crime, or to expand existing gambling.
Most importantly, the Department of Justice is arguing before the World Trade Organization, in the dispute between the U.S. and Antigua, that all interstate gambling is illegal under the Wire Act. The DOJ insisted that any Internet prohibition passed by Congress not expressly authorize Internet betting on Horseracing. The DOJ believes this will allow it to continue to argue that the Interstate HorseRacing Act does not do exactly what it says it does, legalize interstate horseracing.
?5362 Definitions.
Bet or wager includes risking something of value on the outcome of a contest, sports event "or a game subject to chance." The Act otherwise allows contestants to risk money on themselves. The "game subject to chance" restriction is designed to eliminate Internet poker.
The Act then confuses the issue of skill by stating that betting includes purchasing an "opportunity" to win a lottery, which must be predominantly subject to chance. Someone will figure out a way to create an opportunity to win, where the opportunity is subject to some chance. But the Act expressly prohibits lotteries based on sports events.
Betting includes instructions or information. This eliminates the argument overseas operators used that the money was already in a foreign country, so no bet took place in the U.S.
The Act exempts activities that we all know are gambling, but are, by statute, declared not to be gambling. These include securities and commodities, including futures, that are traded on U.S. exchanges. Boilerrooms and bucketshops, selling foreign securities are gambling. Insurance is not.
Free games are not gambling. But there is a special provision that allows sites to offer points or credits to players only if these are redeemable only for more games. Operators of free games, where players can win valuable prizes, will have to stop giving points for wins that can be redeemed for cash. Free bingo, on the other hand, can still give small cash prizes paid out of the advertising budget.
Fantasy leagues are legal, but subject to detailed restrictions. A fantasy team cannot be "based on the current membership of an actual team." What they actually mean is a fantasy team cannot be composed merely of the players of a real team. There is no limit on the cost of entering, but prizes must be announced in advance, and not based on the fees paid by participants. Statistics must be derived from more than one play, more than one player, and more than one real-world event.
Being in the "business of betting or wagering" still does not include mere players. It also expressly does not include financial institutions involved in money transfers.
"Designated payment system" is a new term. It could have been labeled simply "target," as in "you are the target of a criminal investigation." It covers any system used by anyone involved in money transfers, that the federal government determines could be used by illegal gambling. The procedure will be that the Secretary of the Treasury, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and Attorney General will meet and create regulations and orders targeting certain money transfer systems.
"Financial transaction provider" is a very broad definition covering everyone who participates in transferring money for illegal Internet gambling. This expressly includes an "operator of a terminal at which an electronic fund transfer may be initiated," and international payment networks. This covers third party providers, like Neteller.
"Interactive computer service" includes Internet service providers.
"Restricted transaction" means any transmittal of money involved with unlawful Internet gambling.
"Unlawful Internet gambling" is defined as betting, receiving or transmitting a bet that is illegal under federal, state or tribal law. The Act says to ignore the intermediary computers and look to the place where the bet is made or received.
This does not completely solve the problem of Internet poker, or even Internet casinos. The Act does not expand the reach of the Wire Act, the main federal statute the DOJ uses against Internet gambling. Although the DOJ has taken the position that the Wire Act covers all forms of gambling, courts have ruled that it is limited to bets on sports events and races. State anti-gambling statutes have similar weaknesses, including the presumption that they do not apply if part of the activity takes place overseas. This new statute requires that the Internet gambling be "unlawful." But it would often be difficult to find a federal, state or tribal law that clearly made a specific Internet bet illegal.
Nevada and other states are expressly permitted to authorize 100% intrastate gambling systems. Congress required that state law and regulations include blocking access to minors and persons outside the state.
Tribes were given the same rights, with the same restrictions. Two tribes can set up an Internet gaming system, if it is authorized by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. This means that tribes can operate bingo games linking bingo halls on reservations. They can also link progressive slot machines, if their tribal-state compacts allow. But they cannot operate Internet lotteries and other games open to the general public.
It is interesting that Congress decreed that states can decide for themselves if they want to have at-home betting on horseracing, but not on dogracing. Congress also decreed that tribes can operate games that link reservations, even across state lines, but not the states themselves: state lotteries are not exempt.
Congress had a little problem with the term "financial institution." To force casinos to report large cash transaction, federal law was changed to define "financial institution" as including large gambling businesses. Congress had to undo that definition, so that in this Act casinos go back to being casinos.
The other definitions are standard or are described above.
?5363 "No person engaged in the business of betting or wagering may knowingly accept" any money transfers in any way from a person participating in unlawful Internet gambling. This includes credit cards, electronic fund transfers, and even paper checks. But it is limited to Internet gambling businesses, not mere players. It also would not cover payment processors, except under a theory of aiding and abetting.
?5364 Federal regulators have 270 days from the date this bill is signed into law to come up with regulations to identify and block money transactions to gambling sites. At this writing, President Bush had not yet signed this bill, but he will. So the regs will go into effect by the beginning of July 2007.
The regs will require everyone connected with a "designated payment system" to i.d. and block all restricted transactions. So all payment processors are suppose to have systems in place to prevent money from going to operators of illegal Internet gambling. The first step will undoubtedly be to take the credit card merchant code 7995 and expand it to all money transfers. Visa created the 7995 classification in 2001 to avoid having its credit cards used for online gambling. The federal government will order banks and all others involved with electronic money transfers to cease sending funds to any Internet operator who has a 7995 credit card merchant code. Any financial institution that follows the regs cannot be sued, even if it wrongfully blocks a legitimate transaction.
The Act allows the federal regulators to exempt transactions where it would be impractical to require identifying and blocking. This obviously applies to paper checks. Banks have no way now of reading who the payee is on paper checks and cannot be expected to go into that business. Banks tried to defeat this bill, not because they cared about patrons' privacy, but because they knew that it would cost them billions of dollars to set up systems to read paper checks.
I hate politics. I've never voted. The reason I've never voted is b/c I don't think it matters. I lean republican but think its pretty much all the same crap.
If you vote anything other than rep./dem., then your vote is even more wasted.
That said, I'm pretty sure next election I'll register and vote for democrat, unless its Hillary, then I'll kill myself. Bush is worst president ever. I think part of his problem is that he can't commit to his lies and the people can easily see that all he does is try to deceive with confusion.
Gas is outrageous, the war is futile, the muslims are still killing people, etc.
I'm so sick of this two-faced bullshit. If you want to get rid of gambling, then do it. All gambling. No horse racing, no lotteries, even Las Vegas and Atl City. All or nothing. If your going to do the "right thing" then do it.
If you vote anything other than rep./dem., then your vote is even more wasted.
That said, I'm pretty sure next election I'll register and vote for democrat, unless its Hillary, then I'll kill myself. Bush is worst president ever. I think part of his problem is that he can't commit to his lies and the people can easily see that all he does is try to deceive with confusion.
Gas is outrageous, the war is futile, the muslims are still killing people, etc.
I'm so sick of this two-faced bullshit. If you want to get rid of gambling, then do it. All gambling. No horse racing, no lotteries, even Las Vegas and Atl City. All or nothing. If your going to do the "right thing" then do it.
