Kentucky Governor trying to crack down on Online Gambling - Page 2

beaston · 09-25-2008, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biscuit

What's the latest on this, Beaston?

I haven't heard a peep, other than speculation, rumors and recycled stories...nothing's changed that I've seen.

beaston · 09-25-2008, 08:05 PM

*bump*

It seems that the hearing is postponed until tomorrow.

This is all they had to say:

Quote:

“”"Please be advised that the Commonwealth of Kentucky we will be conducting settlement conferences tomorrow with a number of defendants in the above captioned matter. In light of those conferences, the Court has continued tomorrow’s hearing, and rescheduled it for Friday, September 26, 2008 at 3:30 pm est. At that time the Court will consider the claims against the remaining, non-settling defendants. An order from the Court reflecting this change will follow.”"”

Source

beaston · 09-25-2008, 08:40 PM

This just in:

Pointspreads.com has reported that GoldenCasino.com has been handed over to Kentucky lawmakers. GoldenCasino.com was registered with Public Domain Registry, which does business in Oregon.

It looks like the domains that are registered with companies in the United States are bound to the legal requests put forth by Kentucky, and therefore are in jeopardy. All of the overseas registrars are simply ignoring requests. More power to them! Why should they be tied to USA laws?

What I don't understand is this:

www.goldencasino.com still takes you to Golden Casino's website. They took control of the domain, but

Source

Biscuit · 09-26-2008, 04:55 AM

WTF? Is Kentucky now running an online casino? Aren't they breaking the law if they are?

donktheclown · 09-26-2008, 07:40 AM

Wow.. this is totally stupid.. I entirely agree that online gambling screws over governments of tax revenues and jobs, but there's no way Kentucky should have any jurisdiction over casinos registered in Europe, where it's legal. We'll see what the WTO has to say about it. Remember the WTO has been fighting the US for a few years now about their anti-gambling laws and unfair market protection.

beaston · 09-28-2008, 12:08 PM

*Update*

Sorry I didn't post this sooner....

Right now, this case is frozen, and Judge Thomas Wingate, calling this case "very complex," granted a continuance until October 6th.

Key arguments from both sides:

Quote:

Kentucky wants to know who owns those 141 domain names for Internet gambling services.
Wingate gave attorneys for the gambling sites seven days to file briefs on a host of legal issues involving standing, jurisdiction and property rights before he conducts another hearing at which he could allow the state to forfeit the names.

Robert Foote, a Chicago attorney representing the state, told Wingate “no one has standing” to appear before the court until a person or corporation is named.

“A domain name has no right to have a lawyer, only a corporation or person can have a lawyer,” Foote said. “And no one here is going to tell you they represent anyone.”

Do I understand this correctly? Is he trying to say that nobody should be opposing this suit, [edit] unless the OWNERS of the domains come forward? Are they crazy? We all know what happens to casino owners when they step foot on USA soil.

Quote:

William Johnson said he was there representing seven clients and Alice Grimes said she represents goldencasino.com. But they – and other attorneys – declined to say who owned those names.

Instead they argued the action against 141 domain names took place “under cover” and with no notice to their clients. They sought a continuation to brief Wingate on matters of law which they contended will demonstrate the court has no jurisdiction and seeking to dismiss the action.

This is exactly how the UIGEA was passed. Maybe they should bring this up in court as well

Source

dominique · 09-28-2008, 05:50 PM

Kentucky allows the world and Kentuckyans to bet on their races online - horse betting is exempt under UIGEA - yet the world and Kentucky are not allowed to bet on anything else on the internet.

This is good reason for Kentucky to cybersquat and threaten the entire structure of the internet with such an incredible precedent.

Unbelievable! I can't see any logic...

beaston · 09-28-2008, 05:55 PM

I think the owners names (at least the primary holding company's name) will indeed come out in court, but I doubt there's any way for the Judge to force them to actually appear in court.

I think we all know that if that were to happen, they'd be facing jail time for doing so.

It'll be nice to see the TRUE names behind the face of Virtual, if this happens. It'll definitely put to rest any questions as to who's running things over there.

beaston · 10-07-2008, 02:50 PM

*update*

They're now out of court for today, and Franklin County Circuit Court Judge Thomas Wingate will make a ruling within the next week or so.

More details to come later this evening.

beaston · 10-07-2008, 07:54 PM

Okie dokie. Here's some details of todays court hearing.

Quote:

Gov. Steve Beshear's administration - which supports legalizing casino gambling in the state - says the online gambling Web sites are illegal and Kentuckians should not have access to them.

Gambling websites are illegal? Hmmmm, isn't this unconstitutional? Has he forgotten about the first amendment, IE: Freedom of Speech? I think this BS should be thrown out of court for that statement alone.

Quote:

Attorneys opposing the state, however, say Kentucky doesn't have jurisdiction on a case that could have international ramifications.

Of course they don't have jurisdiction. We're talking about the Internet here...*knock knock, anyone home?* NOBODY [in America, at least] has the right to censor the Internet.

Quote:

"These domain names do not exist here," said Jerry Stouck, a Washington attorney representing the Interactive Gaming Council. "They can't be found in Kentucky and therefore they can't be seized here."

Exactly! They're words typed via your keyboard. The last time I checked, there wasn't ANY domain registrar that is based in Kentucky.

Quote:

Attorneys for Kentucky have asked Judge Thomas Wingate to forfeit control to the state of 141 gambling related sites, some of the Internet's most popular. They claim the Web site names should be treated as illegal gambling devices and blocked from doing business in Kentucky.

Are these people SERIOUS? I didn't know people could be so dumb. How can something intangible, such as a domain name, be considered a "gambling device?" We're not talking about a slot machine or poker table here.

Quote:

Beshear, a Democrat, made his support for a constitutional amendment legalizing casino gambling a central focus of his campaign for governor last year. The governor tried and failed earlier this year to get the General Assembly to put a proposed amendment before voters.

Awww, is he having a hissy fit because he couldn't get offline gambling [non-lotto, bingo or horse racing] legalized, so now he's taking it out on Internet gambling? Poor Beshear.

Quote:

Still, Beshear has called the Internet gambling sites targeted by his administration as "leeches on our communities" and acknowledged the move would protect the state's "signature industry."

Some people think that smokers are "leeches on our communities." Maybe next time, he can go after banning big tobacco websites?

This gentleman sums it up very nicely! Is this MASTERS student (with TWO JOBS) a leech on the community as well? He may only be 28, but he's mature beyond his years in my book.

Quote:

Rob Slauenwhite, a 28-year-old Louisville resident, attended Tuesday's court proceedings wearing a shirt that advertised a Web site where he likes to play poker [hahaha, in your face, Beshear!]. Slauenwhite, who works two restaurant jobs and is studying for his master's degree, said he thinks the state is attempting to infringe on personal rights.

"It's just something I like to do in my home," Slauenwhite said, adding that he voted for Beshear because of his support for gambling. "I feel it's more of a state's invasion trying to take that away from me what I'm doing privately in my own home."

But, alas, they're going to keep us in suspense, at least for another week.

Quote:

Wingate said he would hope to have a ruling by next week.

Source