Lee Rousso, attorney and Poker Players Alliance state director for Washington State, will announce that he’s running for governor at 2 p.m. PT on Seattle’s 710 KIRO radio station.

Rousso is the attorney who’s fighting Washington State’s law that makes it a felony to play online poker there. Rousso’s legal challenge is meeting stiff resistance by state attorneys, but he told Card Player that if it can’t be changed through legal means, “The Plan B is to get it changed politically.”

(more…)

Purely as an informational service, we are providing PPA members with information on the records of the leading presidential primary candidates. Bear in mind that we can not make an educated judgment solely from candidates’ votes on the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA), 1) because there were many other issues involved in its last-minute passage through the Congress, and 2) some of the candidates were not in Congress when it passed.

Frankly, there is very little specific information from most of the candidates on this issue, so we are also encouraging you to contact the campaigns of the candidates who interest you, and ask their position. Please let them know you are an undecided voter and a proud poker player when you contact the campaign, so we can illustrate the grassroots strength behind the great game of poker. It’s time to let the presidential primary candidates know that Poker Is Not a Crime!

Notes:

• Under the Internal Revenue Code, as a non-profit 501c4 organization, we are prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. We can provide candidate information.
• PPA Member, TheEngineer, keeps his own Presidential Candidate Scorecard, click here to read the latest.

The Democratic Frontrunners:

Hillary Clinton:

The two-term senator from New York won the New Hampshire Democratic primary. She has recently expressed that she supports the industry’s position: to study Internet gambling to see whether it can be fairly regulated so that individuals can safely participate in it and American businesses can compete in the international market (Las Vegas Sun, 01/18/08). When contacting the campaign, be sure to let them know you are an undecided voter and a proud poker player.

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/help/contact/


Barack Obama:

The senator is from Illinois and winner of the Iowa Democratic caucus. Obama has recently expressed that he worries that the Internet is “a Wild West of illegal activity”, and supports a study of Internet gambling and supports regulation to address the worst abuses (Las Vegas Sun, 01/18/08). He is reputed to be a good player, and doesn’t mind letting it be known that he enjoys playing poker for money. These stories are even on his own website. When contacting the campaign, be sure to let them know you are an undecided voter and a proud poker player.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/contact/

The Republican Frontrunners:

Mike Huckabee:

Republican Iowa caucus winner and former Arkansas governor, Mike Huckabee does have a clear position OPPOSING Internet Poker. Mike Huckabee responded to the National Coalition Against Legalized Gambling’s questionnaire (the only candidate to respond, by the way). In it, he promised to veto any legislation repealing UIGEA or otherwise clearly legalizing online gaming.

Here is the question he was asked, complete with its bias and inaccuracies:

1) Last year, Congress voted overwhelming to criminalize most forms of Internet gambling. This year some members of Congress are promoting legislation to legalize Internet gambling. If such legislation passed, would you veto it? Huckabee answered “yes.” That’s about as clear as it gets.

information@explorehuckabee.com

John McCain:

The New Hampshire Republican primary winner does not have a specific position on Internet poker, but does appear to have been influenced by his fellow Arizona Senator Jon Kyl, who is a vigorous opponent of our rights. McCain, however, has always been willing to consider both sides of an issue and may simply need to know how strongly PPA members feel about this issue. We encourage you to contact his campaign and ask whether he has a specific position, and of course, to let them know you are an undecided voter and a proud poker player.

http://www.johnmccain.com/Contact/

Ron Paul:

In keeping with his Libertarian philosophy, Congressman Paul is a proud supporter of our cause. Rep. Paul has supported and sponsored pro-poker legislation, and has also made time to visit with PPA grassroots members, poker celebrities, and citizens lobbyists every time we have asked. His credentials on allowing adults the freedom to play poker are unblemished.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/contact/form

We cannot process your application because it is not complete.

Please go back to the application and make sure each field is filled out.

Click here to go back to the form.

Thank you for your patience.

In the waning hours of the 2006 Congressional session, Congress passed the Safe Port Act, designed to “improve maritime and cargo security through enhanced layered defenses,” according to the U.S. House website. With passage of the Safe Port Act came a very important rider: The Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. Congress was clueless as to the bombshell it was about to drop on the rest of the globe. The issue has spilled over into the World Trade Organization, which has been in the center of a dispute involving the European Union, Antigua, and the United States. Late in December, Reuters broke a story saying that the EU had accepted a deal.

The issue stems from the United States not allowing gambling from offshore betting houses within its borders, essentially withdrawing from a treaty it had signed earlier. It was exacerbated by passage of the UIGEA and has garnered major international attention. While gambling online in the United States may be questionable in the minds of some, the fact is, according to a recent Financial Times article, “European gaming companies claim to be losing $4 billion annually as a consequence of the U.S. decision to shut its online gambling market, the most lucrative in a growing global business worth $15 billion to $20 billion a year. Until legislation passed by the U.S. Congress [in 2006], which prohibits banks and credit card companies from processing payments to online gamers, the U.S. accounted for half of all online gambling customers worldwide.”

The concessions given by the United States allow the E.U. to tread on “warehousing, technical testing, research and development and outbound international letter delivery.” The extent to which U.S. companies such as UPS, DHL, or FedEx will be affected is unknown. Both of those corporations are coming off the busy time of the year for them and this may be some Scrooge-like news. The Los Angeles Times quoted a spokesperson for Austrian-based Bwin as saying, “We continue to believe that it is better to regulate than to prohibit, because the reality shows that the prohibition only drives out the transparent, listed operators.” An agreement was reached late in the day on a Friday, essentially buried in the weekend news leading up to the holidays. It was eerily similar to the UIGEA, which was itself passed in the witching hours of a Friday night.

Click here to go to the article and read more.

Back on September 26, the Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association made its case to U.S. District Judge Mary Cooper as to why the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act should be declared unconstitutional. A preliminary decision on whether iMEGA had legal standing to file a suit as well as a possible preliminary injunction against the regulations of the UIGEA could have been handed down by the end of October. Flash forward to January, 2008. In the New Year, iMEGA President Edward Leyden is still waiting for a preliminary ruling.

Just to remind you, iMEGA describes itself on its website as a “professional association dedicated to the continued growth and innovation of the Internet. We seek constructive engagement with government at the Federal and State levels to ensure that the challenges of this still nascent medium are addressed with the full participation of the people and companies that have built the Internet into the powerful influence on society it has become.”

One might think that Leyden and iMEGA would be discouraged by Judge Cooper delaying her verdict over two months. However, he is not swayed: “We’re still waiting for Judge Cooper. We haven’t drawn any conclusions. She’s a Federal Judge with a full docket on her plate. I think it’s safe to assume that she’s taking her time on the case to make sure she gets it right. We’re patient and confident the decision will be one we’re happy with. We believe that she’ll uphold our right to standing and we’ll go forward. She may grant the preliminary injunction which we’ve asked for. If either occurs, it’ll be big for our cause. If both occur, it will be an outstandingly important decision.”

Leyden is in touch with the court’s clerks and chambers as needed. He’s constantly walking a fine line between being persistent and being intrusive. As a litigator for over 20 years by trade, Leyden claims the delay is “par for the course.” There has been no timeline given for a formal decision to be passed down.

Click here to go to the article and read more.

This past December, the United States settled a trade dispute with Canada, Europe, and Japan over the recently enacted Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.

The problem is that the law carves out exemptions for some forms of gambling, such as state lotteries and domestic horse racing, while banning most other forms, most notably poker, the most popular form of online wagering.

The most popular online poker sites are all based overseas, where online gambling is legal. This gave rise to the trade dispute between the U.S. and most of the rest of the western world.

The U.S. Trade Office won’t release the terms of the settlement—an odd development itself, given that the settlement involves U.S. tax dollars, was negotiated by employees of the U.S. government, and isn’t likely to involve any information related to national security. But most experts believe that given the immense popularity of online poker, and the fact that America is home not only to most of the world’s poker players but also the wealthiest, the settlement was likely in the tens of billions of dollars.

The U.S. was negotiating from a position of weakness. For the last few years, the tiny island nation of Antigua has been challenging the U.S. online gambling ban in the World Trade Organization. Antigua has won every step of the way.

Last week, just days after the U.S. settlement with Europe, Japan, and Canada, the WTO awarded Antigua $21 million in annual reparations for losses to the Antiguan economy caused by the American ban on Internet gambling. Because tariffs on U.S. goods would hurt the Antiguan economy far more than the U.S. economy, the WTO gave the okay for Antigua to recoup its losses in the form of copyright infringement, essentially making the country a haven for movie, music, and software piracy.

Had the U.S. not settled with the world’s economic powerhouses, we might have seen a massive battle unfold between the U.S. entertainment industry and the moral majority types behind the gambling ban.

Click here to go to the article and read more.

American companies may suffer from the legal piracy of movies, music, computer programs, and other intellectual property after the international regulator of free trade, the World Trade Organization, ruled that a ban on Internet gambling services provided by companies abroad is unlawful.

The WTO decision this week is the culmination of a long-running dispute between the U.S. Commerce Department and foreign gambling companies that are forbidden by American law from accepting bets from Americans.

In a test case brought by Antigua and Barbuda, the Caribbean islands were granted permission to ignore intellectual property rights owned by American companies in compensation for the loss of earnings caused by federal statutes and four American states that have outlawed Internet gambling. The American government responded robustly and with a veiled threat of withholding American investment, claiming in a statement that “it would establish a harmful precedent for a WTO Member to affirmatively authorize what would otherwise be considered acts of piracy, counterfeiting, or other forms” of intellectual property rights infringement.

Sean Spicer, a spokesman for U.S. trade representative, Susan Schwab, said further that if the islands began ignoring American copyright laws, it “would severely discourage foreign investment in the Antiguan economy.”

Antigua was quick to try to mollify the dispute. “Antigua doesn’t want to negate American intellectual property rights. They don’t want to sell … DVDs and copies of Microsoft Office,” the lawyer who represented Antigua in the WTO proceedings, Mark Mendel, said in a press statement.

The WTO ruled that the gambling ban was against the principles of the General Agreement on Trade in Services, the free trade deal of which America is a party, and that America’s failure to comply should be punished by allowing countries affected to ignore copyright laws protecting intellectual property owned by American companies.

Click here to go to the article and read more.

(more…)

Antigua and Barbuda’s finance minister said he is hopeful an international ruling giving his nation the right to impose limited trade sanctions against the U.S. will push Washington to resolve a long-running dispute over Internet gambling.

The World Trade Organization on Friday backed Antigua’s request to target U.S. services, copyrights and trademarks in retaliation for a U.S. online betting ban — but will allow it to impose only $21 million in annual trade sanctions.

Finance Minister Errol Cort described the WTO’s decision as a setback for his twin-island nation, which had sought to apply $3.4 billion in retaliatory measures against U.S.

Still, the ruling could pave the way for resolution, he stressed.

“We think that this decision, as terribly flawed as it may be, should still have the desired result of getting the U.S. to sit down with us and seek an amicable resolution,” Cort said in a statement on Friday. “We look forward to meeting with the U.S. delegation in the very near future.”

Neither the U.S. nor Antigua can appeal the WTO decision.

Antigua accuses the U.S. of crippling its gaming industry by banning Americans from placing online bets with gambling operators, including those based in the Caribbean nation. It sought impose trade sanctions in retaliation for lost revenue.

Click here to go to the article and read more.