ONLINE SPORTSBOOKS

Go Back   MajorWager Forums > MW - Online Sportsbooks > Mess Hall
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Mess Hall Online Sportsbook Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 07:46 PM
stevo stevo is offline
Five Star General
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 64,187
Default WTO Decision on Compensation for Antigua is a Disgrace by Hartley Henderson

WTO Decision on Compensation for Antigua is a Disgrace

The WTO today ruled that Antigua could retaliate with $21 million in cross border trade sanctions against the United States, using suspension of copyrights, trademarks and other intellectual property rights. This was far less than the $3.4 billion being asked for by Antigua but more than the $500,000 the United States offered. Mark Mendel, the lawyer for Antigua, stated in a conference call that he was expecting the WTO to rule with a figure in the $1 billion range.

What was most troubling in the decision reached by the WTO panel was the method they used to arrive at the compensation amount. Rather than considering the true value of all cross border gambling services, as was the commitment made by the U.S., the WTO came to an amount it deemed would have been “reasonable” had the U.S. hypothetically allowed Antigua access to remote gambling on horse racing. In so doing it essentially ignored remote gambling on poker, sports aside from horse racing and casino games. Mark stated frustration with the ruling, because most people understand that there is more remote gambling going on within the United States aside from horse racing and certainly more potential remote gambling. In fact there is discussion about offering interstate poker networks in some states in the near future. Plus of course the Powerball lottery exists in many states. Mark stated that he thought the WTO panel understood his arguments in that regard but based on today’s decision they clearly didn’t. The panel voted 2-1 for the compensation it granted and the panelist who voted against the final amount showed strong dissention. In a released statement Mr. Mendel said the following: “I find it astonishing that two of the three panelists would in essence grant the United States the benefit of a hypothetical method of compliance most favorable to the American side in assessing Antigua’s level of trade impairment. What appears to have been done here is assuming a form of compliance that has not happened and will not happen without giving Antigua the ability to contest the method under the WTO’s normal procedures.”

Mr. Mendel did acknowledge that Antigua could go back to the WTO if and when the U.S. started offering remote gambling on games or sports other than horse racing to show that the ruling was unreasonable and that other forms of remote gambling are occurring in the U.S., but he also stated that Antigua’s resources are limited. Aside from the revenues from gambling, Antigua’s GDP is only about $1 billion. There is no formal timeline for Antigua to retaliate and until such a time that the U.S. either allows remote gambling from Antigua on horse racing (although it still is questionable whether this would bring the U.S. into compliance with its commitments), or until a time when the U.S. and Antigua officially agree on settlement terms it will be business as usual for Antiguan gambling companies. There is also no method in place to appeal a compensatory ruling of the WTO.

While the amount of compensation is relatively small, Mr. Mendel suggested that $21 million in intellectual property rights is substantial and is “a very potent weapon.” Russ Hawkins, the CEO of MajorWager.com concurred and added, “This decision is paramount in the future success of online gaming. If Antigua was smart, they would sell copyright items for a penny apiece and make sure it really makes the U.S. reconsider.” Surely when perfectly legal versions of MS office are being sold for a nickel or when penny DVDs or CDs hit the markets many U.S. corporations such as Microsoft, Warner Brothers and the Recording industry will be banging on the doors of the USTR to do something about it. Having said that Mark Mendel stated that while this is an option it is still not Antigua’s preferred route. “Antigua has operated with due diligence and care in the whole process,” Mark stated adding that at no time would the U.S. seriously talk with him or the Antiguan government. The United States still has to come to terms with India, Costa Rica and Macau but this decision along with the relatively weak agreement by the EU likely makes those talks much easier for the U.S. government.

In the process, the U.S. may feel it has won this battle but in the long term it could seriously damage not only U.S. interests but the interests of all WTO members. The WTO once again has proven that the organization is a one-way street that favors the larger economies and will cause many smaller countries that were thinking of joining the WTO to reconsider. More importantly the decision could have China, Russia and other potentially rogue WTO members licking their chops. The decision by the WTO is now a precedent. A deal is not a deal and a commitment is not a commitment. If a larger country makes a commitment that doesn’t work for them then they can simply opt out under Aticle XXI and the WTO panel will try and minimize damages for them. It thereby makes the WTO process of providing commitments totally meaningless.

One can only surmise why the WTO came to the decision they did, but it is clearly one they will live to regret. In the meantime, people may want to hold off paying $300 to purchase the latest version of Microsoft Office or Vista. By next Christmas, legal versions of the software with full licenses and access codes could be available from Antigua for less than the cost of a postage stamp.

12-21-2007
Hartley Henderson
MajorWager.com
henderson@majorwager.com
__________________
May the odds be ever in your favor.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 07:56 PM
Don Eagleston Don Eagleston is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,140
Default

Sorry Hartley, not going to happen. Antigua, like most nations including Canada, needs the US and its ever declining dollar very badly.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 07:56 PM
Mr Falcone Mr Falcone is offline
Three Star General
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: City of Angels
Posts: 10,107
Default

Quote:
Mark Mendel, the lawyer for Antigua, stated in a conference call that he was expecting the WTO to rule with a figure in the $1 billion range.
Hey Mark, join the Human race......Not even Goliath willing to waste his time pissin up a rope here.

Move on
__________________
The house doesn't beat the player. It just gives him the opportunity to beat himself. ~Nick Dandalos
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 08:33 PM
Don Eagleston Don Eagleston is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,140
Default

Mr. Falcone, Mark was working on a contingent fee basis; that is, a percentage of the take.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 08:44 PM
Mr Falcone Mr Falcone is offline
Three Star General
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: City of Angels
Posts: 10,107
Default

I hear ya.......Whole thing just seems silly to me thats all. It is what it is
__________________
The house doesn't beat the player. It just gives him the opportunity to beat himself. ~Nick Dandalos
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 08:53 PM
SlipperyPete SlipperyPete is offline
Three Star General
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,348
Default

I am no Nostradamus but did anyone think it was gonna be otherwise?
__________________
Stats are like girls in bikinis. They reveal a lot but not everything.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 08:57 PM
Mr Falcone Mr Falcone is offline
Three Star General
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: City of Angels
Posts: 10,107
Default

Nope, said that all along. Until US regulates it themselves, the rest of the World can fuck themselves as far as Big Brother is concerned
__________________
The house doesn't beat the player. It just gives him the opportunity to beat himself. ~Nick Dandalos
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 09:15 PM
stevo stevo is offline
Five Star General
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 64,187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Eagleston View Post
Mr. Falcone, Mark was working on a contingent fee basis; that is, a percentage of the take.
There ya go...........LOL

Answers alot.
__________________
May the odds be ever in your favor.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 09:15 PM
stevo stevo is offline
Five Star General
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 64,187
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Falcone View Post
Nope, said that all along. Until US regulates it themselves, the rest of the World can fuck themselves as far as Big Brother is concerned
Aint it the truth.
__________________
May the odds be ever in your favor.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 09:57 PM
ajax50 ajax50 is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 221
Default

Mendel is your typical greedy pig of a lawyer...got what he deserved. Maybe he can now go after Eddie Hadeed and possibly reclaim some of his expenses for the last 5 years. Autigua is still a banana republic and now they can buy $21 million worth of bananas...........maybe
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 10:49 PM
Don Eagleston Don Eagleston is offline
Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,140
Default

I'll limit my discussion to sports betting which is illegal in every jurisdiction in the US unless licensed (nevada). It is also a federal crime if done interstate under the Wire Act. I believe that sports betting is also illegal in every Canadian province unless licensed (sports lottery). The US chooses to construe the Wire Act (rightly or wrongly) as applying to internet gambling regardless of its origin. Canada has no wire act and apparently ignores the notion that internet gambling violates national and/or provincial law. I note, however, that Canadian Bodog does not accept Canadian customers for some reason. (Too many Canadian sharps like Nittany Lion/Betting Prophets?)

Antigua, on the other hand, has legalized sports gambling and wants to export it to the US over the internet. Is this really any different than Antigua legalizing cocaine and then shipping it to the US through internet orders? I say no even though there is an actual product involved in cocaine distribution that illegally enters the US. (The US gov't has pursued Italian drug dealers who never entered the US.) A difference without a distinction IMO. Both are banned under current US law and the interpretation thereof. In gambling, the product is money which is legal in other contexts.

Will this change any time soon? I don't think so. The mob and the bible thumpers will join forces to continue the status quo. Professional gamblers are insufficient in number to warrant a change.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2007, 11:52 PM
all-in all-in is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,237
Default will take an act of congress

like it or not this bill was passed in 1992

Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992.
Note: As of Mar. 5, 2007, the following are the only states grandfathered from the PASPA: Delaware, Montana, Nevada and Oregon.

Nelson Rose says the bill is unconstitutional but here it 2007 and......

The Day Congress Outlawed Sports Betting and Violated the U.S. Constitution
3 April 2002

By I. Nelson Rose

After losing the Republican presidential nomination to George W. Bush, Arizona Sen. John McCain took up a new crusade -- sports betting.

The media reported McCain's crusade as if it were the first time the federal government confronted Evil Gambling and Organized Crime. In fact, about once a decade some senator or representative trying to make a name for himself pushes for federal laws along these lines.

In the 1930s, it was Sen. Royal S. Copeland of New York, who introduced the federal Anti-Racketeering Act. In the early 1950s, Sen. Estes Kefauver held the first nationally televised hearings, grilling witnesses like "Bugsy's Baby," Virginia Hill, about the connection between gambling and the mob. The hearings helped Kefauver get the Democratic nomination for Vice President in 1956 and produced new federal laws, including a tax on wagers, a ban on gambling ships, and the main restriction on gambling devices, the Johnson Act.

Attorney General Robert Kennedy's War on Crime in the early 1960s led to the Wire Act, the major threat facing Internet gambling today, and more federal laws, including the new crimes of shipping wagering paraphernalia across state lines and traveling across a state line to promote illegal gambling.

The Nixon Administration's contributions were the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, making violation of a state anti-gambling law a federal crime, and adding gambling to the list of crimes which would authorize a wiretap.

But the most amazing attempt by Congress to control Evil Gambling was Sen. Bill Bradley's "Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act."

This 1992 law is so comprehensive that there is really not much left for Sen. McCain to attack. The Nevada sports books were exempted because they were operating legally under Nevada law. So the debate is only whether Congress should, as the current bill states, "prohibit high school and college sports gambling in all States including States where such gambling was permitted prior to 1991."

In the 1970s, the Delaware State Lottery starting taking bets on professional football games. The National Football League sued -- and lost! The NFL claimed that people might think it was endorsing gambling. More importantly, sports teams make a lot of money from their tradenames. The Lottery got around both those problems by having people bet on "Los Angeles" rather than on the "Rams."

The Oregon State Lottery followed and expanded the bets to include games of the National Basketball Association.

That was too much for Sen. Bradley, who had been a star with basketball's New York Knicks.

Sen. Bradley's Act is short and to the point. It makes it unlawful for "a governmental entity to sponsor, operate, advertise, promote, license or authorize by law or compact a lottery, sweepstakes or other betting, gambling, or wagering scheme based, directly or indirectly . . . on one or more competitive games in which amateur or professional athletes participate . . . or on one or more performances of such athletes in such games."

States with existing sports betting were grandfathered in.

This federal law was designed to prevent any new sports betting of any kind, with one exception. The casinos in New Jersey had enough political clout to get Congress to give them one year to get sports betting legalized in that state. But, Sen. Bradley, who also was from New Jersey, had even greater political power. He single-handedly prevented the issue of legalizing sports betting from even being put on the ballot; so the citizens of New Jersey never got to vote on the question.

The Bradley Act is a strange and even frightening federal law for anyone who knows American history.

The federal government had never before tried to regulate or prohibit gambling which took place entirely within a single state. In fact, it does not have the power to do so.

Following the American Revolution, the states decided to create a federal government with limited powers. Congress and the President may think they can do anything they want, but they only have powers given them by the U.S. Constitution.

I can find only two provisions of the Constitution which might apply. The first is Congress's power to regulate Interstate Commerce. But we are talking about purely intra-state activities. The Bradley Act prevents a state legislature from passing a state law that would allow a citizen of that state to make a legal sports bet with another citizen of that same state.

The other possible Constitutional provision is Congress's power to protect tradenames. But the Bradley Act allowed licensed sports books in Nevada to continue to use actual team names, as they had been doing for decades.

Never before did an Act of Congress so blatantly discriminate among the states.

Never before did an Act of Congress so restrict the right of states to raise revenue.

And never before did an Act of Congress give private organizations the power to enforce a federal law against a state. For the most frightening provision of the Bradley Act provides, "A civil action to enjoin [a state from legalizing sports betting] may be commenced . . .by the Attorney General of the United States, or by a professional sports organization or amateur sports organization whose competitive game is alleged to be the basis of [the wager]."

The U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear that a state cannot be sued without its consent. If a state cannot be sued by an Indian tribe or its own state employees, what chance is there that the Court would allow a suit by an amateur sports organization?
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 12-22-2007, 01:48 AM
Hartley Hartley is offline
5 STAR GENERAL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 8,903
Default

Is this really any different than Antigua legalizing cocaine and then shipping it to the US through internet orders

Surely you jest Don.

My biggest problem with the U.S. is they claim to be the spearhead for free trade, and almost demand other countries to open their borders to American goods yet when cases go against them they use every dirty tactic to try and get out of it. I still recall well when they banned Canadian beef because of the mad cow scare but when it was deemed the infected cow was actually from an American farm and the FDA ruled Canadian beef safe they still refused to open the borders back up to Canadian beef because U.S. Beef farmers said that the Canadian industry was forcing their prices down even though that was never the reason they apparently closed the markets in the first place.

Plus of course the WTO ruled numerous times in Canada's favour over the issue of softwood lumber yet the U.S. basicall told the WTO to go fuck themselves and said they didn't agree with the decision so wouldn't abide by it and continued to tax Canadian lumber. Eventually they got a U.S. friendly government in Canada who cut a lesser deal than the WTO's decision demanded.

Mind you they sure in hell expect Canada to provide open up the markets to them for oil, fresh water and other goods because "Canada made a commitment to do so."

Cocaine is illegal everywhere, gambling isn't. The U.S. had the opportunity of withdrawing gambling from its commitments when it signed it and chose not to do so. And the claim it was an error is pure bullshit. Many other countries withdrew that commitment while the U.S. left it in and all countries were discussing it including the United States. My hunch is that the U.S. figured at some point they could be a leader in providing cross border gambling services but when the current Republican government's meal ticket (i.e. the religious right) protested, they recanted.

Here's a better analogy IMO. Say China decided that it no longer wanted Chinese people eating fast food because they all of a sudden deemed it unhealthy even though they agreed to allow American fast food companies to operate in China and provided a commitment in the WTO to do so. Consequently they boot out McDonald's, KFC etc. and when the U.S. complains they say "tough, we erred by allowing them to operate in the first place and there ain't shit you can do about it."
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 12-22-2007, 12:47 PM
nfleqbc nfleqbc is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,333
Default

This actually doesn't seem that bad...

Antigua is entitled to take $21 million a year from Hollywood until such time as the US makes the laws compliant with the WTO decree, which would basically be by getting rid of the special treatment that horseracing receives.

Given how much lobbying power Hollywood has, I think it's a safe bet that Congress will make the law compliant fairly quickly.

The two likely ways to do this are:

* to treat horse betting with Antigua and other nations the same as other interstate phone/online horse betting services (OTB telephone accounts, TVG, etc.)
* to outright ban interstate horse wagering (i.e. revert to the situation that persisted 15-plus years ago) again. Given how much of the handle for the tracks and in the parimutuel pools comes from that type of action, banning that will severely damage the horseracing industry.

Hollywood will demand that one of those two options be chosen.
The horseracing industry will demand that the first be chosen.

So the offshore racebooks will be legalized, and the US will basically be required to add an affirmative defense to UIGEA covering horseracing.

At that point, it's easy for the books and bettors to pretend that the sports betting activity is on the ponies not on the Patriots.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 12-22-2007, 01:06 PM
count zero count zero is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: marin county california
Posts: 4,340
Default

Here's a more likely scenario: Hollywood complains, and the feds give them $21 million of your money every year, end of problem. Feds are happy, Hollywood's happy, who else matters?
__________________
I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 12-22-2007, 01:37 PM
Hartley Hartley is offline
5 STAR GENERAL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 8,903
Default

Sorry nfleqbc but as I understand it based on your two options, #2 will bring the U.S. into compliance, #1 will not. The applelate body ruled that the U.S. was guilty of not offering gambling services as was required under WTO rules. If the U.S. somehow stopped all interstate horse betting and assured that no cross border gambling of any kind ever occurred - (this would mean they couldn't allow poker networks, casino wagering or similar between states and any intentions by tribal gaming to offer services cross border would have to be halted) then the U.S. could say to the WTO that America has no interstate wagering of any sort in the country and its "morals" claim would be upheld.

Simply allowing Antigua to offer horse racing on American races would not solve the problem because it is not only horse racing that is at question. What the WTO dispute panel did say yesterday is that if Antigua could have offered horse racing to Americans as happens remotely in the U.S. now then it would have amounted hypothetically to $21 million. And that is the amount they awarded as damages. The argument is illogical and goes against all previous rules and decisions since the dispute body is supposed to come up with actuals not hypotheticals and Antigua showed it has lost $3.4 billion per year because America did not freely allow wagering from Antigua causing many online gambling companies to withdraw from the country. America committed to "other recreational services" which includes all forms of cross border wagering, not just horse racing.

Until such a time that the U.S. is allowed to withdraw its commitments (which I believe requires the approval of all WTO members who issued complaints), the old commitment stands. The $21 million simply means that Antigua can't charge as much to Americans for software or music (to recoup losses) than if they were allowed $3.4 billion.

Here's a link to the full text of the decision
http://docsonline.wto.org/GEN_highLi... 2FDS285%2FARB
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 12-22-2007, 02:04 PM
Hartley Hartley is offline
5 STAR GENERAL
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 8,903
Default

Count, your making the assumption that the $21 million is based on the fair value of the software, dvds and cds. I'm not sure if that is the case or if it's based on what value Antigua puts on it and consequently sells it for. If it's the latter then as Russ stated in the quote for my article, a penny apiece becomes 2.1 billion legal copies of software available to Americans. It's very unlikely that companies like IBM or Intel would buy them but if you're a small business with tight margins and you can cut tens of thousands of dollars from your costs with fully legal versions of MS Office or Vista (per WTO rules), then wouldn't you consider it??
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 12-22-2007, 02:25 PM
count zero count zero is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: marin county california
Posts: 4,340
Default

If they're concerned about their economy, I'm not sure why Antigua would sell Windows or whatever for a penny, but I actually didn't mean to address anything like that. Just wanted to make the point one more time that, whatever the cost of the ruling, 100% of it will eventually be paid by the taxpayers. So the "government" blatantly protects the incompetent US gaming industry and throws a bone to its Jeezus-kissing base, and when the bill for that short-sighted stupidity comes due, it has to be paid by the same people it negatively impacts.
__________________
I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror like his passengers.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 12-22-2007, 02:29 PM
Uncle B Uncle B is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: denial
Posts: 48,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by count zero View Post

Just wanted to make the point one more time that, whatever the cost of the ruling, 100% of it will eventually be paid by the taxpayers.


Absolutely true...But, i bet Microsoft is still gonna pitch one Hell of a fit..lol
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Claims for Compensation in the Antigua WTO Case are Reasonable...By Hartley Henderson Rogthedodger Mess Hall 3 10-17-2007 12:48 AM
Canada, Macau and Australia File for Compensation in Antigua WTO Case....Hartley Henderson The Major Mess Hall 17 06-28-2007 09:26 PM
Canada , Macau and Australia File for Compensation in Antigua WTO Case...By Hartley Henderson Rogthedodger Mess Hall 1 06-26-2007 12:17 AM
Antigua & EU Ask for Compensation as Deadline Approaches...By Hartley Henderson Rogthedodger Mess Hall 2 06-21-2007 12:22 AM
WTO Ruling on Antigua Due Out Soon...By Hartley Henderson Rogthedodger Mess Hall 19 01-26-2007 04:20 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:38 PM.

Please be advised that if you are wagering over the internet, this is illegal in many jurisdictions. A wagering site may be operating legally at their location but it may still be illegal for you to wager from your location. We suggest you check on the legal situation from any jurisdiction in which you may wager.
 

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6