| 1:35 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
What a horrible, dastardly crime. Thank goodness they got this person off the street. Who knows what harm he could have caused if left unfettered?
Seriously, I'm surprised that Americans aren't completely up in arms over this whole mess. I'm also surprised the online casino's and related folks haven't started to do some lobbying. There's no way this stands up to scrutiny - but no one seems to be performing the scrutiny.
| 1:44 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
they should voluntarily submit 30% of their profit to the US treasury. The Govt' would be too embarrased to arrest them :)
On second thought: the states would want a share as well.
| 1:54 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
>>Thank goodness they got this person off the street.
Its to protect the legal casinos and lotteries actually.
| 1:59 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Its to protect the legal casinos and lotteries actually. |
That's a crock. Has nothing to do with protecting them. It has to do with the govt. not getting their share.
| 2:02 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
You got that right - the "legal" casinos want to be the only game in town.
| 2:27 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Probably has more to do with US politicians not getting a share in the way of campaign contributions because you can lobby all you want, but until that lobbying results in politicians getting something in their pockets, nobody is going to be listening and willing to help your effort.
I would imagine that in order to use neteller, it requires a credit card or a bank draft, so why isn't visa, mastercard or a US bank getting charged?
| 2:33 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Our government is so utterly corrupt, I'm speechless.
| 2:42 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
That makes 2 of us.
I suspect the money going into the political pockets is from the US casino owners. Get the offshore businesses completely out of the picture, then legalized online gambling will emerge - but only to sites run by the local interests.
[edited by: MamaDawg at 2:43 pm (utc) on Jan. 17, 2007]
| 3:18 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
does this mean anyone who facilitated the transfer of funds between bank accounts and "illegal sites" is likely to get jailed?
surely this could include paypal and any other payment processors, or am i missing something.
[edited by: hughie at 3:21 pm (utc) on Jan. 17, 2007]
| 3:20 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
"Its to protect the legal casinos and lotteries actually."
Protect them from what? This is not an American company and these are not American citizens. The US has absolutely no jurisdiction over these people, or this company.
You know what should happen? Other countries should start arresting US citizens. There are plenty of businesses that are legal in the US but illegal in other countries. Lets see what happens when the directors of US companies start getting arrested because the content of their company websites is breaking laws in other countries. Can you imagine the US outrage?
Arrogance and hypocrisy, plain and simple.
What the world has come to expect actually....
| 3:28 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I agree, Mange. That's a pretty heavy right hand punch.
And to think that the American left hand is busy with various initiative to improve America's image abroad!
| 3:29 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Crap. I have money in my Neteller account right now.
I hope those pending credits clear soon so I can get them back to my bank account.
| 3:43 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I'll sum it up in a sentence: "Might makes right."
No one is saying that is right or fair, but it's the reality. Other countries have done, and still do the same when they can.
| 4:01 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|You know what should happen? Other countries should start arresting US citizens. There are plenty of businesses that are legal in the US but illegal in other countries. Lets see what happens when the directors of US companies start getting arrested because the content of their company websites is breaking laws in other countries. Can you imagine the US outrage? |
I'd imagine none, if they are arrested in the countries whose citizens they prey on.
|Lefebvre was arrested Monday in Malibu, California, and was scheduled to appear in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles Tuesday. Lawrence, who resides in Paradise Island, Bahamas, was arrested Monday in the U.S. Virgin Islands and will appear in federal court on Wednesday |
...the company acknowledged when it went public that U.S. law prohibited people from promoting certain forms of gambling, including Internet gambling and transmmitting funds that are known to have been derived from criminal activity.
Lefebvre and Lawrence also conceded in the company's offering documents that they were risking prosecution by the U.S. government, he said.
If there's any arrogance, it would seem to be on the part of Lefevbre and Lawrence.
It takes brass ones to admit that you are breaking the law in country X, and then go to country X.
Why weren't they living the high life on the Isle of Man?
I can see them now - "Marcel, what's on the menu?" "Spuds and Herrin (potatoes and herring)". Ummmmmm.. They can now dine on equally apatizing fare in one of our fine U.S. facilities.
[edited by: jtara at 4:07 pm (utc) on Jan. 17, 2007]
| 4:04 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I saw this coming last summer when U.S. agents were arresting gambling site operators as they entered the U.S..
I had a feeling they would come after Neteller because that was the best "bet" for funding the poker site I play on.
I luckily pulled my money from the site and now play with play chips.
Honestly this is a crock of crap.
IF I want to throw my money away playing poker or betting on the Yankees why is it then I have to be in Vegas?
Pure crap absolutely!
| 4:11 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Actually paypal settled with the US govt a few years back and now won't handle payments to casinos.
I'm sure other money transfer sites are also being targetted. I would also assume those in charge of those sites will be staying far away from the US now. ;)
| 4:28 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
so by settling, paypal have avoided this? even though the charges go back to 99..
If paypal have it begs the question as to why neteller didn't do the same. If they've been given the opportunity to comply then it's difficult to suggest they've been hard done by.
| 4:43 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|If paypal have it begs the question as to why neteller didn't do the same. |
Because they would have had no business left. This is what they do. They don't have much in the way of non-gambling-related business, and the payers are almost all in the U.S.
They are basically in the business of thwarting U.S. law.
PayPal has a much broader business base.
[edited by: jtara at 4:47 pm (utc) on Jan. 17, 2007]
| 4:45 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
yep...I believe the settlement was for $10M and kept charges from going any further.
Paypal is also a US company so it's much more compelled to abide by US law. Neteller is based out of the Isle of Man so they likely figured they were safe.
| 5:05 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
The USA needs to learn the concept, that you charge the people that commit the crimes, not the people that build systems that can be legal or illegal depending on jursdiction.
Maybe we should arrest the people that run the US banking system, as it can be used to laundry money or wire money to cubu, iran , etc.
Expect this to be thrown out of court.
Its also interesting that the USA is not abiding by the laws of the International court at the Hague (when they find it conveient), however they are trying to push their own laws outside their own jursdiction.
Here in Canada, the Royal bank was shutting down American Dollar bank accounts, for Canadians born in Iran, Cuba, etc, because the American Administration told them to.
Fortunately, the other Canadian banks, realized that Canadian laws apply in Canada, and not American laws, and are not doing the same.
| 5:07 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I'm seriously disgusted.
| 5:11 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
My understanding is that the gov't is looking for a scape goat as evidence that they care about online gambling. And casinos would be more interested in a taxing online gambling.
With the financial reserves that these neteller guys have I bet they go free.
| 5:31 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I've heard that online casino would like the govt to get involved so that they can just become legal. If they DID and if they were taxed and the like, they'd probably be just as profitable if not moreso because it'd be easier for people to use their services. Plus, they'd have a way to separate the good ones from the bad.
And from what I understand, the enforcement is more towards the online transaction people than the people who use it. Do a G search on poker news, lots of sites cover this stuff.
| 5:45 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|Maybe we should arrest the people that run the US banking system, as it can be used to laundry money or wire money to cubu, iran , etc. |
Actually, we have a fairly through tracking system for this. The U.S. banking industry has gone to considerable expense and effort to comply with the tracking laws.
If U.S. banks were in gross non-compliance, I'm certain there WOULD be arrests.
It's not easy to use the U.S. banking system to launder money. That's one of the reasons companies like this one exist.
| 5:54 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Funny - I mentioned this to my girlfriend, who grew up in eastern europe and all she said was "Hmm sounds like something that Russia would do."
But I'm still not sure I understand what's going on - If it's a publicly traded company in the UK how does the US have jurisdiction? It just seems scary that a couple Canadians with a company on the Isle of Man, traded in London, are arrested in the US.
Wondering what all this means for affiliates..
| 5:56 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
Fast solution: move to canada.
It's freakin' cold up here right now though. Bring your woolies.
I agree on the comment about lobbying. This seems to be politically motivated legislation, so why aren't the deep pockets of the online gambling companies working on this loudly and politically?
Say these folks lost 50% of their revenue overnight. Why aren't they taking some substantial portion of that into an effort to change the laws? (maybe they are and it's just not public info).
| 5:59 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
All the more reason to have the next pubcon in Vancouver- Otherwise attendees might not get past the border!
| 6:04 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
|If it's a publicly traded company in the UK how does the US have jurisdiction? |
Because (at least the the eyes of the law) they are harming U.S. citizens. And they were arrested on U.S. soil.
If somebody were mailing letter bombs or anthrax to U.S. citizens from abroad, do you think they should not be arrested when they set foot inside the U.S.? Obviously a big difference in level of harm, but the same legal principals apply.
These people have no problem taking advantage of U.S. luxuries and living it up in Malibu on their illicit profits. Why SHOULDN'T they be arrested?
They had the choice of staying out of the country. Their arrogance did them in.
Working to change the law is the right way to go. These people haven't chosen that route. I doubt they would be willing to comply with the regulation that would go with that.
|All the more reason to have the next pubcon in Vancouver- Otherwise attendees might not get past the border! |
That answers my unasked question as to why the management of this site seems to have such a keen interest in this topic. I've never been to a PubCon. I guess online gambling interest represent a large percentage of the attendees and/or exhibitors?
| 6:16 pm on Jan 17, 2007 (gmt 0)|
I think someone misses the obvious that these 2 nitwits, um, defendants, put in their disclosures that they were violating US law and risking prosecution, then were idiotic enough to come to the US to be prosecuted.
You can say whatever you want about the US or the laws or the government, but these 2 are just FLAMING STUPID!
I think the subtopic should be "Dumb and Dumber in the slammer"
[edited by: incrediBILL at 6:18 pm (utc) on Jan. 17, 2007]
| This 70 message thread spans 3 pages: 70 (  2 3 ) > > |