Saturday, May 31, 2008
UB Scandal is Front Page News in Canada
The Ultimate Bet cheating scandal made the front page of Canada's National Press today. Citing the investigative work of 2+2'ers such as Cornell Fiji (Steven Ware), the article does a very nice job of explaining simply and concisely what happened and how without blowing the issue out of proportion or making unwarranted claims about online poker in general. Specifically, the article expresses concern for the credibility of the Kahnawake Gaming Commission:Bobby Mamudi, an industry analyst and managing editor of the London-based Gaming Intelligence Group, said the new cheating incident is another blow to the reputation of Kahnawake's gambling industry. "They definitely do seem to be losing credibility and not doing too much about it," he said.The article also includes more empty promises from the KGC:
Murray Marshall, legal counsel to the gaming commission, said that Kahnawake's regulation is among "the tightest in the world" and said similar frauds have occurred in casino gambling and banking. "We would obviously prefer to prevent all possibilities of this kind of thing happening, but no system is infallible," he said.Tightest in the world? What does that even mean? How did the same shit get past them twice? Not only did they fail to identify cheating that amateur internet sleuths could and did identify, but to my knowledge there are no documented incidents of the KGC actually doing anything except for fining Absolute Poker after the fact. Their tight regulation hasn't managed to catch or prevent any malfeasance.
The article also raises the troubling specter of legal action against the online gaming industry by the Canadian government:
The federal government considers the 400 or so poker and sports-betting sites operating from Kahnawake to be illegal, but, fearing a confrontation, both the federal and provincial governments have been reluctant to intervene. Last March, however, an aide to Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said the government was studying ways of shutting down the gambling, possibly by targeting financial transactions with illegal Internet operators.Let's hope that doesn't come to pass, and that future news outlets that cover this and other internet poker stories handle them with the same thoroughness and even-handedness that the National Press does here.
Labels: Absolute Poker, cheating, legislation, poker, Ultimate Bet
Stumble It!
Friday, May 30, 2008
The Ultimate Bet Superuser Scandal
Ultimate Bet released a press release today admitting that employees of "the previous ownership of UltimateBet" were responsible for cheating high limit players out of an unspecified amount of money, largely believed to run into the millions, thanks to "unauthorized software code that allowed the perpetrators to obtain hole card information during live play". In other words, UB employees could see players' hole cards and exploited this to steal quite a lot of money from high stakes players over the course of about two years.
The theft was uncovered through the collective effort of several 2+2'ers who were high stakes regulars at UB affected by the theft, most prominently trambopoline, dlpnyc21, josem, and also Nat Arem. 2+2 Moderator Cornell Fiji composed a thorough summary of what is believed to have happened along with the damning evidence that goes well beyond what UB admits in its press release.
In this new thread, Cornell is once again doing an admirable job exposing all of the deception in the press release. I'm not going to try to summarize it all, but basically it is at the very least a shameful lapse, and more probably deliberate negligence, that UB's security didn't notice any of this until 2+2's amateur investigators compiled undeniable evidence. If security isn't tracking win rates and investigating the play of the biggest winners in the biggest games on the site, what exactly are they doing? How is it that amateurs with nothing more than Poker Tracker databases can unravel this stuff, but a supposedly professional security team cannot?
Moreover, UB claims that it knew nothing about the potential for its software to be exploited in this way. But UB is owned by Tokwiro Enterprises, which also owns Absolute Poker, which was the subject of another scandal where a similar vulnerability was exploited from the inside. It's absurd for them to claim that they couldn't have anticipated this, and it's disgraceful that they either didn't anticipate it or actively facilitated the theft.
Nat Arem had a chance to question one of their representatives, but don't expect too much new info from that Q&A session.
Like Absolute Poker, UB tries to reassure its customers by pointing to its "regulatory agency", the Kahnawake Gaming Commission. Aside from the gross incompetence (or worse) demonstrated above, there's another big problem with the KGC: Joe Norton, the owner of Tokwiro Enterprises, is also the former Grand Chief of the Kahnawake Mohawk tribe of Montreal! In other words, there is nothing independent about the KGC.
During his time as Grand Chief, Norton was accused of more than his share of shady dealings and corrupt bargains. Though members of his tribe accused him of being a puppet of the Quebec government, he also had a well-publicized (in Canada) clash with Canadian police and soldiers.
In a lot of ways, this latest scandal is very discouraging and disheartening. However, both UB and AP were eventually forced to admit that something had gone wrong and to return player funds that were stolen. This demonstrates the power of the online poker community to exercise some level of independent oversight over the sites where we play. Ideally, this will discourage other sites from trying anything shady in the future. However, if the only ramification for UB, after all this time and effort, is that they have to return the funds that weren't theirs to begin with, then this will not be much of a deterrent.
So what can we do? I've got some ideas, and I hope you'll offer others.
1. Boycott AP and UB. I never played on AP, and I've pulled all of my money off of UB. If a scandal like this doesn't bankrupt UB or at least crush their market share, then it will not be a deterrent to any future malfeasance by them or anyone else. I was probably one of maybe twenty people regularly playing 25/50 NL on their site, so hopefully my action will be missed, as will that of other high limit players who refuse to play there.
2. Stop endorsing them. High-profile players like Annie Duke and Phil Hellmuth need to end their affiliation with UB. It is downright unethical for them to be encouraging people to play on this site. Similarly, Cliff "JohnnyBax" Josephy should be ashamed of himself for signing with them this week. He claims he was convinced of their desire to change, but based on what he's said publicly about this, it doesn't seem like he was especially well-informed about the allegations nor that he went to great lengths to question whomever he spoke with from UB's management. Then again, he is supposedly a pretty shrewd businessman, so perhaps he knows something I don't. But I think he ought to either say a lot more about why he has confidence in UB or stop encouraging others to play there.
3. Ask tough questions of other sites. I'm no expert on this, but personally, Poker Stars and Full Tilt Poker are the only sites I'm comfortable playing on right now. Still, I think it would be best to get specific, public statements from them about the nature of their security, why their software is not vulnerable to the exploits that led to the theft on UB and AP, who regulates them and how, etc. UB and AP have been able to hedge, make misleading statements, and deny responsibility because in many cases they had not made explicit statements before these scandals about the nature of their security. As players, we should have a more explicit understanding of the level of security the sites will provide. There should be measurable benchmarks and pre-agreed ramifications for them if something illicit happens on their site. If 2+2 could create a Players' Bill of Rights or something, thousands of us could ask sites like Poker Stars, FTP, and especially UB to agree to it as a condition for our business.
4. Create a genuinely independent regulatory authority with teeth. Similar to (3), there should at least be an independent regulator whom sites could voluntarily hire to certify the security of their software. Then we as players could refuse our business to anyone who didn't pay for that certification. There's probably money to be made here if it's done right, and it would be a huge boon for online poker generally.
5. Legalize and regulate online poker in the US. Obviously I think this would be a good thing anyway, but as much as opponents of poker may try to use scandals such as this as arguments against legalization, I believe they are actually arguments in favor. Not that government involvement is a guarantor of legitimacy, but it's got to be better than the legal netherworld in which internet poker currently exists. Once again, there's money to be made here.
6. Spread a genuine understanding of the issue. Casual players have a right to know about the security issues at AP and UB, and its in our interest to have them playing on the more reputable sites where we are taking our business. At the same time, we don't want to be fearmongers turning the poker world off to internet poker in general. We need simultaneously to inform people that UB and AP are unsafe but that there have not even been any plausible suspicions raised about extensive cheating at sites like FTP and Poker Stars. I honestly feel that the risk of cheating on those sites is barely higher than it is in brick and mortar casinos and much lower than at underground poker clubs. However, I'll feel a lot more comfortable vouching for the credibility of those sites if and when some of my above suggestions are implemented.
Stumble It!
The theft was uncovered through the collective effort of several 2+2'ers who were high stakes regulars at UB affected by the theft, most prominently trambopoline, dlpnyc21, josem, and also Nat Arem. 2+2 Moderator Cornell Fiji composed a thorough summary of what is believed to have happened along with the damning evidence that goes well beyond what UB admits in its press release.
In this new thread, Cornell is once again doing an admirable job exposing all of the deception in the press release. I'm not going to try to summarize it all, but basically it is at the very least a shameful lapse, and more probably deliberate negligence, that UB's security didn't notice any of this until 2+2's amateur investigators compiled undeniable evidence. If security isn't tracking win rates and investigating the play of the biggest winners in the biggest games on the site, what exactly are they doing? How is it that amateurs with nothing more than Poker Tracker databases can unravel this stuff, but a supposedly professional security team cannot?
Moreover, UB claims that it knew nothing about the potential for its software to be exploited in this way. But UB is owned by Tokwiro Enterprises, which also owns Absolute Poker, which was the subject of another scandal where a similar vulnerability was exploited from the inside. It's absurd for them to claim that they couldn't have anticipated this, and it's disgraceful that they either didn't anticipate it or actively facilitated the theft.
Nat Arem had a chance to question one of their representatives, but don't expect too much new info from that Q&A session.
Like Absolute Poker, UB tries to reassure its customers by pointing to its "regulatory agency", the Kahnawake Gaming Commission. Aside from the gross incompetence (or worse) demonstrated above, there's another big problem with the KGC: Joe Norton, the owner of Tokwiro Enterprises, is also the former Grand Chief of the Kahnawake Mohawk tribe of Montreal! In other words, there is nothing independent about the KGC.During his time as Grand Chief, Norton was accused of more than his share of shady dealings and corrupt bargains. Though members of his tribe accused him of being a puppet of the Quebec government, he also had a well-publicized (in Canada) clash with Canadian police and soldiers.
In a lot of ways, this latest scandal is very discouraging and disheartening. However, both UB and AP were eventually forced to admit that something had gone wrong and to return player funds that were stolen. This demonstrates the power of the online poker community to exercise some level of independent oversight over the sites where we play. Ideally, this will discourage other sites from trying anything shady in the future. However, if the only ramification for UB, after all this time and effort, is that they have to return the funds that weren't theirs to begin with, then this will not be much of a deterrent.
So what can we do? I've got some ideas, and I hope you'll offer others.
1. Boycott AP and UB. I never played on AP, and I've pulled all of my money off of UB. If a scandal like this doesn't bankrupt UB or at least crush their market share, then it will not be a deterrent to any future malfeasance by them or anyone else. I was probably one of maybe twenty people regularly playing 25/50 NL on their site, so hopefully my action will be missed, as will that of other high limit players who refuse to play there.
2. Stop endorsing them. High-profile players like Annie Duke and Phil Hellmuth need to end their affiliation with UB. It is downright unethical for them to be encouraging people to play on this site. Similarly, Cliff "JohnnyBax" Josephy should be ashamed of himself for signing with them this week. He claims he was convinced of their desire to change, but based on what he's said publicly about this, it doesn't seem like he was especially well-informed about the allegations nor that he went to great lengths to question whomever he spoke with from UB's management. Then again, he is supposedly a pretty shrewd businessman, so perhaps he knows something I don't. But I think he ought to either say a lot more about why he has confidence in UB or stop encouraging others to play there.
3. Ask tough questions of other sites. I'm no expert on this, but personally, Poker Stars and Full Tilt Poker are the only sites I'm comfortable playing on right now. Still, I think it would be best to get specific, public statements from them about the nature of their security, why their software is not vulnerable to the exploits that led to the theft on UB and AP, who regulates them and how, etc. UB and AP have been able to hedge, make misleading statements, and deny responsibility because in many cases they had not made explicit statements before these scandals about the nature of their security. As players, we should have a more explicit understanding of the level of security the sites will provide. There should be measurable benchmarks and pre-agreed ramifications for them if something illicit happens on their site. If 2+2 could create a Players' Bill of Rights or something, thousands of us could ask sites like Poker Stars, FTP, and especially UB to agree to it as a condition for our business.
4. Create a genuinely independent regulatory authority with teeth. Similar to (3), there should at least be an independent regulator whom sites could voluntarily hire to certify the security of their software. Then we as players could refuse our business to anyone who didn't pay for that certification. There's probably money to be made here if it's done right, and it would be a huge boon for online poker generally.
5. Legalize and regulate online poker in the US. Obviously I think this would be a good thing anyway, but as much as opponents of poker may try to use scandals such as this as arguments against legalization, I believe they are actually arguments in favor. Not that government involvement is a guarantor of legitimacy, but it's got to be better than the legal netherworld in which internet poker currently exists. Once again, there's money to be made here.
6. Spread a genuine understanding of the issue. Casual players have a right to know about the security issues at AP and UB, and its in our interest to have them playing on the more reputable sites where we are taking our business. At the same time, we don't want to be fearmongers turning the poker world off to internet poker in general. We need simultaneously to inform people that UB and AP are unsafe but that there have not even been any plausible suspicions raised about extensive cheating at sites like FTP and Poker Stars. I honestly feel that the risk of cheating on those sites is barely higher than it is in brick and mortar casinos and much lower than at underground poker clubs. However, I'll feel a lot more comfortable vouching for the credibility of those sites if and when some of my above suggestions are implemented.
Labels: Absolute Poker, Annie Duke, cheating, Full Tilt Poker, legislation, news, Phil Hellmuth, poker, Poker Stars, Two Plus Two, Ultimate Bet
Stumble It!
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Poker Video: DiMasi and Patrick
Just found this sweet, kind of random video over on the GPSTS blog:
Stumble It!
Labels: legislation, poker
Stumble It!
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Massachusetts Rally Update
On Tuesday, I posted about a rally I attended at the Massachusetts State House to protest a provision of Governor Patrick's casino legislation that made playing poker online a felony punishable by up to $25,000 and/or two years in jail. I'm happy to report that the committee holding a hearing on the bill that day did not recommend it to the full Congress and that, when it did come to the floor, the bill was voted down.
Professor Charles Nesson of Harvard Law School, who has been trying to determine who or what interests are pushing this anti-internet gambling language, has it from Governor Patrick's mouth that the source of this provision is Attorney General Coakley.
The Poker Players' Alliance now has some links to news coverage of the rally and some pictures up on their site, including the one above, of the Poker Prison prop that I mentioned on Tuesday. Here's a good group shot, I'm on the left towards the back in the black and white hat:
Labels: legislation, personal, poker
Stumble It!
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Rally at the State House
I dragged my ass out of bed this morning and got over to the State House around 8:30 AM for a rally, organized by the Poker Players' Alliance and by Harvard Law School professor Charlie Nesson and his Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society.
Since they were going to have coffee and donuts, I literally rolled out of bed, put some clothes on, and left my apartment in a showerless, foodless, caffeineless fog. Unfortunately, this resulted in my not checking my camera batteries or bringing spares. The damn thing was dead, so I don't have any pictures of my own, though there should be some up online soon.
We were there in opposition to a portion of a casinos bill, endorsed by Governor Patrick, that would make playing online poker a felony punishable by up to two years in prison and/or a $25,000 fine. As Drew Lesofski, the PPA's grassroots organizer, pointed out, this is worse than the penalty for drunk driving.
Especially troubling is that no one will admit to backing this provision of the legislation. As Nesson writes in an op/ed piece for today's Boston Globe:
After beelining for coffee and a Boston Cream donut, I found Charlie and his partner-in-crime as GPSTS, Andrew Woods, and congratulated them on the turnout. They introduced me to Drew Lesofski and also to Randy Castonguay, the PPA's Massachusetts director.
A few minutes later, someone called out for everyone to follow him, and I dutifully followed the tide of bodies until I realized I was the only one not wearing a hard hat. Apparently the union people were actually here in support of the casinos bill, which would create tens of thousands of new union jobs. That didn't stop them from stealing our coffee and donuts, though.
When I rejoined my fellow online poker advocates, I was disappointed to find that we numbered no more than forty. We did, however, stand out in our bright red t-shirts that declared "Poker is Not a Crime". As I said, I didn't have my camera, but you can see Nesson and others wearing the shirts in this photo that accompanied a Globe article on the hearing.
Also eye-catching was the cardboard "poker prison" built by Randy's wife and mother, who contributed some badly needed estrogen to our contingent.
Randy and Charlie both spoke to our humble mass for a few minutes, in vastly contrasting styles. Randy was all energy, shamelessly barking into a bullhorn about freedom, the right to play poker, and a man he knew with congenitive heart failure who claimed that online poker was the only joy left in his life. He came across as a little cheesy, but I think that's probably an asset for a job like his, and I certainly admire his willingness to show so much spirit despite the lackluster response from the crowd.
Charlie was the just the opposite, soft-spoken and contemplative. Personally, I found his arguments about the educational value of poker as a strategic game and a model for business and economics much more convincing. He concluded with a call-and-response chant that we were going to use when the governor walked past. Raising his voice for the only time during his speech, he shouted, "Now is the time!"
"Poker's not a crime!" we all shouted back.
Then it was time for him and Randy to head into the State House for the hearing. About half of our number went in as well, but I had no interest at all in watching the open hearing, which Andrew Woods warned me could take many, many hours. So I stayed outside as the union congregation filed past us.
Imagine, if you will, a few dozen scrawny internet geeks facing down a few hundred burly guys in hard hats shouting jeers at us. "Nice turnout!" was the one that hurt the most. The excuse was made that it was 9AM the morning after St. Patty's day and much of the college student/frat boy crowd was hung over, but I'm sure 99% of those union guys spent yesterday ****faced as well. They were just more passionate and better organized. Oh and probably getting paid overtime to be there.
Governor Patrick never did come by, but I did meet a few people from 2+2, including two pretty cool guys who guy by the screen names Self Made and Schwza. We talked poker for a while and considered going inside, but the union guys were lined up out the door and all the way down to the street waiting to get in, and the guards announced that no one else would be admitted. So, we went our separate ways.
I'll post an update with more photos and links as they become available.
Stumble It!
Since they were going to have coffee and donuts, I literally rolled out of bed, put some clothes on, and left my apartment in a showerless, foodless, caffeineless fog. Unfortunately, this resulted in my not checking my camera batteries or bringing spares. The damn thing was dead, so I don't have any pictures of my own, though there should be some up online soon.
We were there in opposition to a portion of a casinos bill, endorsed by Governor Patrick, that would make playing online poker a felony punishable by up to two years in prison and/or a $25,000 fine. As Drew Lesofski, the PPA's grassroots organizer, pointed out, this is worse than the penalty for drunk driving.
Especially troubling is that no one will admit to backing this provision of the legislation. As Nesson writes in an op/ed piece for today's Boston Globe:
"Who wrote the bill’s strange provision to criminalize online games? The governor’s people say it wasn’t him (even though it’s nominally his bill). The Las Vegas casino interests say it’s not them. So who put it in there? Who stands behind it now? Perhaps both questions will be put to the governor today, at the Legislature’s public hearing. Inquiring minds want to know."I found our crew just across the street from the State House, on the Boston Commons. There looked to be about a hundred people milling around, many of them in hard hats. It didn't seem implausible to me that online poker would be popular among the blue collar crowd.
After beelining for coffee and a Boston Cream donut, I found Charlie and his partner-in-crime as GPSTS, Andrew Woods, and congratulated them on the turnout. They introduced me to Drew Lesofski and also to Randy Castonguay, the PPA's Massachusetts director.
A few minutes later, someone called out for everyone to follow him, and I dutifully followed the tide of bodies until I realized I was the only one not wearing a hard hat. Apparently the union people were actually here in support of the casinos bill, which would create tens of thousands of new union jobs. That didn't stop them from stealing our coffee and donuts, though.
When I rejoined my fellow online poker advocates, I was disappointed to find that we numbered no more than forty. We did, however, stand out in our bright red t-shirts that declared "Poker is Not a Crime". As I said, I didn't have my camera, but you can see Nesson and others wearing the shirts in this photo that accompanied a Globe article on the hearing.
Also eye-catching was the cardboard "poker prison" built by Randy's wife and mother, who contributed some badly needed estrogen to our contingent.
Randy and Charlie both spoke to our humble mass for a few minutes, in vastly contrasting styles. Randy was all energy, shamelessly barking into a bullhorn about freedom, the right to play poker, and a man he knew with congenitive heart failure who claimed that online poker was the only joy left in his life. He came across as a little cheesy, but I think that's probably an asset for a job like his, and I certainly admire his willingness to show so much spirit despite the lackluster response from the crowd.
Charlie was the just the opposite, soft-spoken and contemplative. Personally, I found his arguments about the educational value of poker as a strategic game and a model for business and economics much more convincing. He concluded with a call-and-response chant that we were going to use when the governor walked past. Raising his voice for the only time during his speech, he shouted, "Now is the time!"
"Poker's not a crime!" we all shouted back.
Then it was time for him and Randy to head into the State House for the hearing. About half of our number went in as well, but I had no interest at all in watching the open hearing, which Andrew Woods warned me could take many, many hours. So I stayed outside as the union congregation filed past us.
Imagine, if you will, a few dozen scrawny internet geeks facing down a few hundred burly guys in hard hats shouting jeers at us. "Nice turnout!" was the one that hurt the most. The excuse was made that it was 9AM the morning after St. Patty's day and much of the college student/frat boy crowd was hung over, but I'm sure 99% of those union guys spent yesterday ****faced as well. They were just more passionate and better organized. Oh and probably getting paid overtime to be there.
Governor Patrick never did come by, but I did meet a few people from 2+2, including two pretty cool guys who guy by the screen names Self Made and Schwza. We talked poker for a while and considered going inside, but the union guys were lined up out the door and all the way down to the street waiting to get in, and the guards announced that no one else would be admitted. So, we went our separate ways.
I'll post an update with more photos and links as they become available.
Labels: legislation, poker, trip report
Stumble It!
Friday, January 25, 2008
Professor Nesson on the Colbert Report!
I just saw him a few days ago and he didn't say a word about this to me. Pretty sweet though!
Stumble It!
Labels: legislation, poker
Stumble It!
Thursday, January 24, 2008
GPSTS in PokerNews
More good press for the Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society, with PokerNews running a piece on them today:
"The Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society already has chapters established or planned at Harvard, UCLA, Stanford, Carnegie-Mellon, Cornell, Michigan, Tufts, Indiana–South Bend, and George Washington, and is looking to establish chapters at many more schools. Although the GPSTS was just recently started, the growth and development of the program is a fast success."
Stumble It!
"The Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society already has chapters established or planned at Harvard, UCLA, Stanford, Carnegie-Mellon, Cornell, Michigan, Tufts, Indiana–South Bend, and George Washington, and is looking to establish chapters at many more schools. Although the GPSTS was just recently started, the growth and development of the program is a fast success."
Labels: legislation, poker
Stumble It!
Thursday, November 15, 2007
House Judiciary Committee Hearing
The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing yesterday morning entitled, "Establishing Consistent Enforcement Policies in the Context of Online Wagers". Annie Duke's testimony has gotten particularly good reviews. It definitely helps to portray poker as a wholesome pursuit when a witness can open her testimony with, "As a mother of four who supports her family as a professional poker player...." Annie followed up her testimony with an online chat session for the Washington Post, addressing issues such as the fairness of online versus casino gaming and specifically the recent Absolute Poker scandal.
On a lighter note, I've found it both amusing and a little troubling to watch all of the young American poker players on 2+2 encountering the US legislative process for the first time. When the UIGEA was first introduced, many did not understand the bicameral system and grossly overestimated the importance of this issue to the general public. Some asked if it wouldn't be possible to convince President Bush to veto the bill, as though he would use his first veto on Port Security legislation (to which the UIGEA was attached as a rider). This quote from the 2+2 Legislation Forum sums up quite nicely the general sentiment among them now: "watching these old farts make decisions based on ablsolutely outdated ideas and principals makes me wish there was an age limit to run for congress..."
Stumble It!
On a lighter note, I've found it both amusing and a little troubling to watch all of the young American poker players on 2+2 encountering the US legislative process for the first time. When the UIGEA was first introduced, many did not understand the bicameral system and grossly overestimated the importance of this issue to the general public. Some asked if it wouldn't be possible to convince President Bush to veto the bill, as though he would use his first veto on Port Security legislation (to which the UIGEA was attached as a rider). This quote from the 2+2 Legislation Forum sums up quite nicely the general sentiment among them now: "watching these old farts make decisions based on ablsolutely outdated ideas and principals makes me wish there was an age limit to run for congress..."
Labels: legislation, poker
Stumble It!
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Charming Betsy
Full Tilt Poker blogger and editor (their book is pretty good, and addresses some subjects not covered by a lot of the poker literature) has an interesting piece on the applicability of international law to online gaming in the US. He mentions that superstar attorney Alan Dershowitz, representing BetOnSports, is arguing that,
"the Wire Act and other laws forming the basis for the government's case, in their application against internet services offered in foreign countries and accessible by U.S. residents, is inconsistent with a treaty the U.S. agreed to (and in some instances benefits from by enforcing AGAINST OTHER COUNTRIES), the General Agreement on Trade Services (GATS). The treaty, which was negotiated in 1994 and ratified by Congress in the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, limits restrictions on the supply of services from one treaty member to another. This treaty happens to be very specific in its enforcement mechanisms, so it's not "advisory" or "self-executing" - the government can't ignore it just because it doesn't feel like following it."
You'll have to read the article (or be one of the many current/recent law school students reading this) to find out how this doctrine came to be called Charming Betsy.
Stumble It!
"the Wire Act and other laws forming the basis for the government's case, in their application against internet services offered in foreign countries and accessible by U.S. residents, is inconsistent with a treaty the U.S. agreed to (and in some instances benefits from by enforcing AGAINST OTHER COUNTRIES), the General Agreement on Trade Services (GATS). The treaty, which was negotiated in 1994 and ratified by Congress in the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, limits restrictions on the supply of services from one treaty member to another. This treaty happens to be very specific in its enforcement mechanisms, so it's not "advisory" or "self-executing" - the government can't ignore it just because it doesn't feel like following it."
You'll have to read the article (or be one of the many current/recent law school students reading this) to find out how this doctrine came to be called Charming Betsy.
Labels: legislation, poker
Stumble It!
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Innovative Thinking: The Educational Value of Poker
Harvard Law School's Global Poker Strategic Thinking Society is hosting a conference this Saturday entitled "Innovative Thinking: The Educational Value of Poker" featuring Jim McManus, Mike Sexton, and Dr. Alan Schoonmaker.
The conference will be a convening of academics, teachers, students, and other interested parties to analyze and discuss the educational value of poker. Jim McManus will present his new book “The History of Poker” (excerpt), analyzing past American luminaries, from senators to presidents to generals, for whom poker has been a significant aspect of their education. Mike Sexton will discuss the explosion of the popularity of poker, the lessons that poker teaches, and the manner in which the intense popularity of poker makes it possible to reach students. Alan Schoonmaker will present his article, co-written with David Sklansky, “Poker is Good for You”, analyzing the lessons of poker. The conference will be open, and anyone interested in the study of poker and in investigating the utility of poker is encouraged to attend.
For more information or to register for the conference (it's free), visit http://gpsts.org/conference.
I'm disappointed that I won't be able to attend this conference myself, and I very much hope that someone from 2+2 can bring back a thorough report. If you attend, please consider writing up a report- I'd be delighted to post it here and give you full credit.
Labels: legislation, poker
Stumble It!
Sunday, November 4, 2007
The Importance of Regulation
Adanthar wrote a great piece recently about the potential effect of the Absolute Poker scandal on the Poker Player Alliance's efforts to legitimize online poker in the US. He cites the lack of a market response to the revelations of cheating as evidence that informal regulation by the community of high stakes players is insufficient and concludes that,
"there is nothing that could be worse for us at this point than a widely held perception that online poker really *is* rigged that we cannot instantly refute in a single sentence. That has got to immediately change. In the short term, the change may have to come from the sites themselves or from their licensing agencies - certainly, the KGC's new...umm, existence...is a start, as is the theoretical new culture of transparency at AP - but in the long run, we must both accept and embrace governmental oversight." [emphasis is his]
In the event of another scandal, he argues, the best legislative outcome we could hope for would be a bill that legalized online play but explicitly excluded these unaccountable, overseas operations. For preservation of access to existing sites, he recommends three things:
"1)The sites have got to maintain their newly improved security procedures and remain on their best behavior.
2)The PPA must be more proactive with respect to these issues than it is now, and must seek to develop some sort of platform for answering the question "What form of regulation should Congress impose?" Simply seeking a "legalize and forget" bill without wondering about what happens if and when someone asks for conditions - and a large number of Congressmen surely will - is not good enough.
3)Either the PPA or the sites themselves (same thing, really) must come up with some sort of PR strategy for handling these types of issues in a coordinated fashion."
I couldn't agree more, and I hope that he is able to participate in this process, as he suggests he might.
Stumble It!
"there is nothing that could be worse for us at this point than a widely held perception that online poker really *is* rigged that we cannot instantly refute in a single sentence. That has got to immediately change. In the short term, the change may have to come from the sites themselves or from their licensing agencies - certainly, the KGC's new...umm, existence...is a start, as is the theoretical new culture of transparency at AP - but in the long run, we must both accept and embrace governmental oversight." [emphasis is his]
In the event of another scandal, he argues, the best legislative outcome we could hope for would be a bill that legalized online play but explicitly excluded these unaccountable, overseas operations. For preservation of access to existing sites, he recommends three things:
"1)The sites have got to maintain their newly improved security procedures and remain on their best behavior.
2)The PPA must be more proactive with respect to these issues than it is now, and must seek to develop some sort of platform for answering the question "What form of regulation should Congress impose?" Simply seeking a "legalize and forget" bill without wondering about what happens if and when someone asks for conditions - and a large number of Congressmen surely will - is not good enough.
3)Either the PPA or the sites themselves (same thing, really) must come up with some sort of PR strategy for handling these types of issues in a coordinated fashion."
I couldn't agree more, and I hope that he is able to participate in this process, as he suggests he might.
Labels: legislation, poker
Stumble It!
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]