vpFREE2 Forums

Online casino

Is there a regulatory body to report a casino that cheats or withholds
funds?

"Elliott L.Shapiro" wrote:

Is there a regulatory body to report a casino that cheats or withholds
funds?

That, in a nutshell, is the problem with online casinos. In most
cases, no. They locate those online casinos in countries where there's
no regulation.

···

--
Pat O'Connell
Take nothing but pictures, Leave nothing but footprints,
Kill nothing but vandals...

--- In vpFREE@y..., Elliott L. Shapiro <eshapiro@j...> wrote:

Is there a regulatory body to report a casino that cheats or

withholds

funds?

Elliott, give this a shot :
http://www.onlineplayersassociation.com/

Good luck.

hockeystl

It is against the law to be playing on line to begin with and now you
want to report a casino for withholding funds or cheating you? I am
not trying to be rude - but are you seriously considering this?

-- In vpFREE@y..., Elliott L. Shapiro <eshapiro@j...> wrote:

Is there a regulatory body to report a casino that cheats or

withholds

···

funds?

I do not play on "on-line" casinos as I do not trust any casino where
manipulation is so readily available.
No one has cheated me or withheld funds as there are no funds to
withhold.
Merely a matter of curiosity.
As there are probably 500 or more on line casinos, there must be a lot
of people who are acting against the law.

···

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:27:02 -0000, you wrote:

It is against the law to be playing on line to begin with and now you
want to report a casino for withholding funds or cheating you? I am
not trying to be rude - but are you seriously considering this?

-- In vpFREE@y..., Elliott L. Shapiro <eshapiro@j...> wrote:

Is there a regulatory body to report a casino that cheats or

withholds

funds?

vpFREE Home Page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE

vpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Against the Law to play on an online casino?

Hmmm could you please give me the actual reference(s) to this law and
when it was passed?

The only thing I was aware of was State regulations regarding horse
and greyhound betting via the internet and also charge card companies
being pressured to not allow their charge cards to be used.

As for an actual United States law that states an United States
citizen will break the law - is there really an actual law on this
yet? If so please give the specifics.

Thanks for the your help on this.

Lew

--- In vpFREE@y..., Elliott L. Shapiro <eshapiro@j...> wrote:

I do not play on "on-line" casinos as I do not trust any casino

where

manipulation is so readily available.
No one has cheated me or withheld funds as there are no funds to
withhold.
Merely a matter of curiosity.
As there are probably 500 or more on line casinos, there must be a

lot

of people who are acting against the law.

>It is against the law to be playing on line to begin with and now

you

>want to report a casino for withholding funds or cheating you? I

am

>not trying to be rude - but are you seriously considering this?
>
>-- In vpFREE@y..., Elliott L. Shapiro <eshapiro@j...> wrote:
>> Is there a regulatory body to report a casino that cheats or
>withholds
>> funds?
>
>
>
>vpFREE Home Page:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE
>
>vpFREE Links:
>http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

···

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:27:02 -0000, you wrote:
>
>

I thought you were asking because you were having a problem. Sorry.

--- In vpFREE@y..., Elliott L. Shapiro <eshapiro@j...> wrote:

I do not play on "on-line" casinos as I do not trust any casino

where

manipulation is so readily available.
No one has cheated me or withheld funds as there are no funds to
withhold.
Merely a matter of curiosity.
As there are probably 500 or more on line casinos, there must be a

lot

of people who are acting against the law.

>It is against the law to be playing on line to begin with and now

you

>want to report a casino for withholding funds or cheating you? I

am

>not trying to be rude - but are you seriously considering this?
>
>-- In vpFREE@y..., Elliott L. Shapiro <eshapiro@j...> wrote:
>> Is there a regulatory body to report a casino that cheats or
>withholds
>> funds?
>
>
>
>vpFREE Home Page:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE
>
>vpFREE Links:
>http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

···

On Wed, 30 Oct 2002 16:27:02 -0000, you wrote:
>
>

--- In vpFREE@y..., Elliott L. Shapiro <eshapiro@j...> wrote:
snip

As there are probably 500 or more on line casinos, there must be a

lot of people who are acting against the law.

Interestingly enough, most online winners seem to be from the US, and
aren't at all concerned about having their names and pictures
published.

Did anyone watch or read about the Party Poker Million? I don't
recall seeing a single finalist that wasn't from the US. Seems most
people aren't the least bit concerned with our toothless laws. . .

Against the Law to play on an online casino?

<<<
Hmmm could you please give me the actual reference(s) to this law and
when it was passed?

  I think the wire act might cover this. There is some question
about the idea that the wire act may not cover the internet, but it
seems that the difference between phone lines and the internet is not
significant and that the wire act should cover this activity.

  Of course, if the constitution is to be considered applicable,
the government should have no access to your online transmissions
unless it has evidence that you are engaging in illeal activity.
And no, simply having data going to and from a known gambling site
should not constitute sufficient evidence. In fact, you should
be able to send data anonymously and with whatever encryption you
desire. Even if the government has a right to intercept your
data, I see no reason why you should be compelled to send it in a
form they can decipher. The idea that electronic commmunications should
have less privacy than the privacy one has in ones home is a joke.
The idea is that people have the right to discuss things in private.
The concept of discussion is unchanged simply because the form of
communication is something other than a face to face discussion.

  If I am wrong about the constitutional right to private
discussions, someone please correct me.

  QZ

<<<
That, in a nutshell, is the problem with online casinos. In most
cases, no. They locate those online casinos in countries where there's
no regulation.

  Only because countries such as the US are too stupid to
legalize, regulate and tax online casinos. The offshore casinos
would evaporate quickly if US based and regulated online casinos
were allowed. Millions of US dollars are disapperaing from our
economy in this manner. The impact on our economy may or may not
be significant, but it is surely not a good one.

  QZ

--- In vpFREE@y..., "Quad Zilla" <quadzilla666@e...> wrote:
Thanks for your reply.

But I keep hearing that is is not legal to play on an online casino
thru the internet - yet nobody seems to know what law and when it was
passed that covers this.

Has anyone been arrested for just playing via their home computer?
If so - could someone point me in the direction of the information
for the case etc?

Thanks !

Against the Law to play on an online casino?

<<<
Hmmm could you please give me the actual reference(s) to this law

and

when it was passed?
>>>

  I think the wire act might cover this. There is some question
about the idea that the wire act may not cover the internet, but it
seems that the difference between phone lines and the internet is

not

significant and that the wire act should cover this activity.

  Of course, if the constitution is to be considered

applicable,

the government should have no access to your online transmissions
unless it has evidence that you are engaging in illeal activity.
And no, simply having data going to and from a known gambling site
should not constitute sufficient evidence. In fact, you should
be able to send data anonymously and with whatever encryption you
desire. Even if the government has a right to intercept your
data, I see no reason why you should be compelled to send it in a
form they can decipher. The idea that electronic commmunications

should

···

have less privacy than the privacy one has in ones home is a joke.
The idea is that people have the right to discuss things in private.
The concept of discussion is unchanged simply because the form of
communication is something other than a face to face discussion.

  If I am wrong about the constitutional right to private
discussions, someone please correct me.

  QZ

PLEASE tell me what law and when it was passed.

Thanks !

--- In vpFREE@y..., "mcuddington" <mcuddington@h...> wrote:

--- In vpFREE@y..., Elliott L. Shapiro <eshapiro@j...> wrote:
snip
> As there are probably 500 or more on line casinos, there must be

a

lot of people who are acting against the law.

Interestingly enough, most online winners seem to be from the US,

and

aren't at all concerned about having their names and pictures
published.

Did anyone watch or read about the Party Poker Million? I don't
recall seeing a single finalist that wasn't from the US. Seems

most

···

people aren't the least bit concerned with our toothless laws. . .

I am sorry but I have to ask you directly MissDeuces - What Law?
Please provide me with the specifics on when it was passed.

I have been told by a lot of people that it is against the law only
to find out it wasn't passed yet as law in the United States.

Any information as to this is greatly appreciated as I have been
thinking about playing online but keep hearing I would be arrested!
I know that a lot of the charge cards now can't be used but .....

Thanks for your help !

Lew

--- In vpFREE@y..., "missdeuces" <MissDeuces@a...> wrote:

It is against the law to be playing on line to begin with and now

you

···

want to report a casino for withholding funds or cheating you? I am
not trying to be rude - but are you seriously considering this?

-- In vpFREE@y..., Elliott L. Shapiro <eshapiro@j...> wrote:
> Is there a regulatory body to report a casino that cheats or
withholds
> funds?

I have asked the same question in a couple of groups, and people have
sent me links, but I'm sorry I no longer have them. Some of them
are ambiguous, so I still have doubts on this issue. Legislation is
proposed every year to make online gaming illegal. Why the need for
new laws, if it already IS?

How can an illegal activity be advertised on Court TV? And why have
we never heard of a single player being prosecuted? Instead, we have
dozens of Americans with their faces splashed over The Travel Channel
and Casino Player, and they seem to have no concern. If our laws are
valid, they must not have any teeth at all.

I'd much prefer to see this clearly legalized, regulated, and taxed.

mc

--- In vpFREE@y..., "lewbr2002" <lewbr2002@y...> wrote:

But I keep hearing that is is not legal to play on an online casino
thru the internet - yet nobody seems to know what law and when it

was

···

passed that covers this.

I can assure you that online gaming is a violation of current Federal Law. New legislation has been proposed to make it easier to prosecute this crime but the Federal Wire Waging Act and other money laundering statutes are used to prosecute this crime. While individual bettors are not usually prosecuted, those who operate these services are charged and often convicted. On October 22, 2002, J.B. Van Hollen, United States Attorney for the Western District of Wisconsin, announced the unsealing of an indictment that charged David Hampton Tedder, age 56, of Winter Springs, Florida, with conspiracy to violate the Wire Wagering Act, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

A federal grand jury in Madison returned the indictment on September 12, 2002. Count One charges Tedder's participation and assistance in running Gold Medal Sports, an offshore sportsbook located on the island of Curacao. The indictment alleges that Tedder assisted the operations of Gold Medal Sports by creating shell corporations and offshore bank accounts for Gold Medal subsidiaries for the purpose of developing Internet gaming software, including sports betting.

The authority to prosecute these violations is far from ambiguous and has been upheld by the United States District Courts. In addition, online gaming violates state gaming statutes in virtually every state including Nevada. Cases are not often prosecuted due to jury appeal but the activity itself is illegal.

see:
18 U.S.C.A. § 1084

UNITED STATES CODE ANNOTATED

TITLE 18. CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I -- CRIMES

CHAPTER 50 -- GAMBLING

§ 1084: Transmission of wagering information; penalties

  1.. Syndicated Gambling: Sections 801-811 of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, which amended Title 18, United States Code, by adding Sections 1511 and 1955, are designed to combat "illegal gambling business" or syndicated gambling. Title 18, U.S.C. § 1511 is directed at the political and police corruption which makes widespread illegal gambling possible, while Title 18, U.S.C. § 1955 is directed at the illegal gambling itself.

  2.. Basis for Federal Jurisdiction: Congress enacted this legislation pursuant to its power to regulate interstate commerce. In so doing, Congress made the finding that illegal gambling does involve widespread use of and does have an effect upon interstate commerce. Hence, the Federal Government has jurisdiction to initiate investigations and prosecutions of persons conducting large scale illegal gambling businesses without showing that the proscribed activity has affected interstate commerce. Perez v. United States, 402 U.S. 146 (1971); United States v. Sacco, 491 F.2d 995 (9th Cir. 1974); United States v. Harris, 460 F.2d 1041, 1048 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 877 (1972); Schneider v. United States, 459 F.2d 540 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 877 (1972).

  3.. Scope of Federal Jurisdiction: Congress did not intend to occupy the field of illegal gambling exclusively nor to relieve local law enforcement bodies of their obligations to enforce local gambling provisions. The syndicated gambling laws are directed only at those individuals who operate gambling businesses of major proportions: selection of targets for investigation and prosecution should be made on that basis. See United States v. Hawes, 529 F.2d 472 (5th Cir. 1976); United States v. Riehl, 460 F.2d 454, 458 (3d Cir.1972).

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: mcuddington
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 6:50 AM
  Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Online casino

  I have asked the same question in a couple of groups, and people have
  sent me links, but I'm sorry I no longer have them. Some of them
  are ambiguous, so I still have doubts on this issue. Legislation is
  proposed every year to make online gaming illegal. Why the need for
  new laws, if it already IS?

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Interesting that although internet gambling is currently illegal in the US, both MGM and Park Place are planning to get into the online market. I think it was an MGM official who was quoted as saying something like, "we'll have to trust US citizens not to do it."

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: Video Poker Vegas
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 7:16 AM
  Subject: [vpFREE] ONLINE GAMING IS ILLEGAL

  I can assure you that online gaming is a violation of current Federal Law. New legislation has been proposed to make it easier to prosecute this crime but the Federal Wire Waging Act and other money laundering statutes are used to prosecute this crime. While individual bettors are not usually prosecuted, those who operate these services are charged and often convicted. On October 22, 2002, J.B. Van Hollen, United States Attorney for the Western District of Wisconsin, announced the unsealing of an indictment that charged David Hampton Tedder, age 56, of Winter Springs, Florida, with conspiracy to violate the Wire Wagering Act, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

  A federal grand jury in Madison returned the indictment on September 12, 2002. Count One charges Tedder's participation and assistance in running Gold Medal Sports, an offshore sportsbook located on the island of Curacao. The indictment alleges that Tedder assisted the operations of Gold Medal Sports by creating shell corporations and offshore bank accounts for Gold Medal subsidiaries for the purpose of developing Internet gaming software, including sports betting.

  The authority to prosecute these violations is far from ambiguous and has been upheld by the United States District Courts. In addition, online gaming violates state gaming statutes in virtually every state including Nevada. Cases are not often prosecuted due to jury appeal but the activity itself is illegal.

  see:
  18 U.S.C.A. § 1084

  UNITED STATES CODE ANNOTATED

  TITLE 18. CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

  PART I -- CRIMES

  CHAPTER 50 -- GAMBLING

  § 1084: Transmission of wagering information; penalties

    1.. Syndicated Gambling: Sections 801-811 of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, which amended Title 18, United States Code, by adding Sections 1511 and 1955, are designed to combat "illegal gambling business" or syndicated gambling. Title 18, U.S.C. § 1511 is directed at the political and police corruption which makes widespread illegal gambling possible, while Title 18, U.S.C. § 1955 is directed at the illegal gambling itself.

    2.. Basis for Federal Jurisdiction: Congress enacted this legislation pursuant to its power to regulate interstate commerce. In so doing, Congress made the finding that illegal gambling does involve widespread use of and does have an effect upon interstate commerce. Hence, the Federal Government has jurisdiction to initiate investigations and prosecutions of persons conducting large scale illegal gambling businesses without showing that the proscribed activity has affected interstate commerce. Perez v. United States, 402 U.S. 146 (1971); United States v. Sacco, 491 F.2d 995 (9th Cir. 1974); United States v. Harris, 460 F.2d 1041, 1048 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 877 (1972); Schneider v. United States, 459 F.2d 540 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 877 (1972).

    3.. Scope of Federal Jurisdiction: Congress did not intend to occupy the field of illegal gambling exclusively nor to relieve local law enforcement bodies of their obligations to enforce local gambling provisions. The syndicated gambling laws are directed only at those individuals who operate gambling businesses of major proportions: selection of targets for investigation and prosecution should be made on that basis. See United States v. Hawes, 529 F.2d 472 (5th Cir. 1976); United States v. Riehl, 460 F.2d 454, 458 (3d Cir.1972).
     
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: mcuddington
    To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
    Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 6:50 AM
    Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Online casino

    I have asked the same question in a couple of groups, and people have
    sent me links, but I'm sorry I no longer have them. Some of them
    are ambiguous, so I still have doubts on this issue. Legislation is
    proposed every year to make online gaming illegal. Why the need for
    new laws, if it already IS?

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
  vpFREE Home Page:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE

  vpFREE Links:
  http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thankyou for the time and effort you spent on answering this for me.

It certainly looks like all these ads I see trying to entice me into
gambling online are trying to get me arrested.

BUT your examples clearly only show the cases were against operators
of online casinos.

So what do you say we boycott all the magazines that are supported by
the online casino ads !

Thanks again.

--- In vpFREE@y..., "Video Poker Vegas" <vpvegas@c...> wrote:

I can assure you that online gaming is a violation of current

Federal Law. New legislation has been proposed to make it easier to
prosecute this crime but the Federal Wire Waging Act and other money
laundering statutes are used to prosecute this crime. While
individual bettors are not usually prosecuted, those who operate
these services are charged and often convicted. On October 22, 2002,
J.B. Van Hollen, United States Attorney for the Western District of
Wisconsin, announced the unsealing of an indictment that charged
David Hampton Tedder, age 56, of Winter Springs, Florida, with
conspiracy to violate the Wire Wagering Act, and conspiracy to commit
money laundering.

A federal grand jury in Madison returned the indictment on

September 12, 2002. Count One charges Tedder's participation and
assistance in running Gold Medal Sports, an offshore sportsbook
located on the island of Curacao. The indictment alleges that Tedder
assisted the operations of Gold Medal Sports by creating shell
corporations and offshore bank accounts for Gold Medal subsidiaries
for the purpose of developing Internet gaming software, including
sports betting.

The authority to prosecute these violations is far from ambiguous

and has been upheld by the United States District Courts. In
addition, online gaming violates state gaming statutes in virtually
every state including Nevada. Cases are not often prosecuted due to
jury appeal but the activity itself is illegal.

see:
18 U.S.C.A. § 1084

UNITED STATES CODE ANNOTATED

TITLE 18. CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

PART I -- CRIMES

CHAPTER 50 -- GAMBLING

§ 1084: Transmission of wagering information; penalties

  1.. Syndicated Gambling: Sections 801-811 of the Organized Crime

Control Act of 1970, which amended Title 18, United States Code, by
adding Sections 1511 and 1955, are designed to combat "illegal
gambling business" or syndicated gambling. Title 18, U.S.C. § 1511 is
directed at the political and police corruption which makes
widespread illegal gambling possible, while Title 18, U.S.C. § 1955
is directed at the illegal gambling itself.

  2.. Basis for Federal Jurisdiction: Congress enacted this

legislation pursuant to its power to regulate interstate commerce. In
so doing, Congress made the finding that illegal gambling does
involve widespread use of and does have an effect upon interstate
commerce. Hence, the Federal Government has jurisdiction to initiate
investigations and prosecutions of persons conducting large scale
illegal gambling businesses without showing that the proscribed
activity has affected interstate commerce. Perez v. United States,
402 U.S. 146 (1971); United States v. Sacco, 491 F.2d 995 (9th Cir.
1974); United States v. Harris, 460 F.2d 1041, 1048 (5th Cir.), cert.
denied, 409 U.S. 877 (1972); Schneider v. United States, 459 F.2d 540
(8th Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 877 (1972).

  3.. Scope of Federal Jurisdiction: Congress did not intend to

occupy the field of illegal gambling exclusively nor to relieve local
law enforcement bodies of their obligations to enforce local gambling
provisions. The syndicated gambling laws are directed only at those
individuals who operate gambling businesses of major proportions:
selection of targets for investigation and prosecution should be made
on that basis. See United States v. Hawes, 529 F.2d 472 (5th Cir.
1976); United States v. Riehl, 460 F.2d 454, 458 (3d Cir.1972).

   
  From: mcuddington
  To: vpFREE@y...
  Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 6:50 AM
  Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Online casino

  I have asked the same question in a couple of groups, and people

have

  sent me links, but I'm sorry I no longer have them. Some of

them

  are ambiguous, so I still have doubts on this issue. Legislation

is

  proposed every year to make online gaming illegal. Why the need

for

···

  ----- Original Message -----
  new laws, if it already IS?

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

It certainly looks like all these ads I see trying to entice me into
gambling online are trying to get me arrested.

  Given the widespread number of violations and lack of any
effort at enforcement, you are more likely to get hit by a train
while swimming than to get arrested for this. Given the wars on terrorism
and drugs, the government simply has no resources or interest in
policing this kind of thing at the consumer level.

BUT your examples clearly only show the cases were against operators
of online casinos.

So what do you say we boycott all the magazines that are supported by
the online casino ads !

  Personally, I see that as a bad idea. However, some companies
have succumbed to pressures in this area. Yahoo has removed all their
casino ads, for example.

  QZ

As an individual bettor, you have almost a zero chance of being prosecuted at the Federal level. The problem with online gaming is:

A. You don't know if it's fair, you could be cheated.

B. You don't know for sure you will be paid if you do win.

C. You have no legal recourse since you can't sue in U.S. courts to recover losses, which result from illegal activity.

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: lewbr2002
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 11:26 AM
  Subject: [vpFREE] Re: ONLINE GAMING IS ILLEGAL

  Thankyou for the time and effort you spent on answering this for me.

  It certainly looks like all these ads I see trying to entice me into
  gambling online are trying to get me arrested.

  BUT your examples clearly only show the cases were against operators
  of online casinos.

  So what do you say we boycott all the magazines that are supported by
  the online casino ads !

  Thanks again.

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

<<<
As an individual bettor, you have almost a zero chance of being prosecuted
at the Federal level. The problem with online gaming is:

A. You don't know if it's fair, you could be cheated.

B. You don't know for sure you will be paid if you do win.

C. You have no legal recourse since you can't sue in U.S. courts to recover
losses, which result from illegal activity.

  I agree that this is generally true. However, there are a number of online
poker rooms with outstanding reputations. One thing that does help keep
these
operations in line is that public opinion about intergrety has a huge
potential
to wipe out their business. Lots of poker players discuss these issues on
various
online forums, such as rgp and 2+2. So, it actually makes business sense
for
the major poker rooms to operate on the level. Of course, there may not be
much
stopping them from simply closing shop and taking all deposits. That is one
reason
why I play on several and rarely let my balances get very large. This is
also
a factor with standard online casinos, though I don't know how well
developed
the lines of communication between players is.

  QZ

···

-----Original Message-----
From: Video Poker Vegas [mailto:vpve…@…net]
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 2:26 PM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: ONLINE GAMING IS ILLEGAL