60 Minutes to Cover Online Poker this Sunday

Uh-oh.

Last March, I did a post about how the 60 Minutes crews were interviewing online poker players and digging into the cheating scandal at Absolute Poker. A few months later, another scandal broke out at UltimateBet, which happened to be owned by the same company.

At the time, I thought the results of the investigation would be televised shortly.

I was wrong about that, and over the ensuing months I gradually forgot all about the story. I kinda figured that maybe 60 Minutes shelved the story.

Not so.

According to CBS, they will be broadcasting that story this Sunday. You can see a preview of the story here.

As you will see from the clip, this does not look like your run of the mill puff-piece. They are going to talk about the cheating. In detail.

Frankly, I don't know whether to be ecstatic or very scared.

On the one side, this is a story that needs to be told. Not only is it an interesting story about smart people using their brains to solve a crime that the nobody else was taki... [More]

Could the AGA Be Changing Its Stance?

Sometimes you hit a nerve, I guess.

Last month, after finally noticing AGA President Frank Fahrenkopf's right wing affiliations, I climbed up on my high horse and fired off a rather scathing - even for me - post about how Fahrenkopf's political affiliations might be affecting his business judgement. Or vice versa.

Anyway, it seems that either Mr. Fahrenkopf read my post, or somebody else read it and explained it to him.

And apparently he didn't like the image he was portraying to the world, because he immediately set to work disproving everything I wrote about him. And as a person in his position is wont to do, he has managed to have the media record his every move.

Look at the media output Fahrenkopf has generated since my offensive:
US Casino Giants Mull Online Gaming Moves (gambling911.com)Legalised U.S. Internet Gambling Back On The Agenda (Online-Casinos.com)... [More]

This is not a joke

A few months ago, I got myself signed up on the mailing list of the American Family Association.

As they are one of the more ardent opponents to online gambling, I thought it would be a good idea to keep tabs on what they were up to. You know, keep your enemies close, yada yada yada.

However, after several months of receiving weekly emails urging me to boycott [insert company name here] due to the fact that they give same sex benefits, I finally managed to get unsubscribed. It was a waste of time.

But all things considered, I have to admit that they managed to truly offend my sensibilities only a couple of times, which was a lot less than I suspected.

Until now.

Take a look at this, and ask yourself if this is not the most culturally offensive thing you have seen in a while.

I am at a loss for words. They are actually serious about selling burning crosses.

An Analysis of the Finalized UIGEA

Over the past year, I've written extensively - some would say obsessively - about the UIGEA. But one topic I've never really covered is an in-depth discussion about the exact legal implications of the law.

This might sound like a huge oversight, but I have a great defense.

The fact is that until the UIGEA rules were finalized yesterday, there were NO exact legal implications to discuss. Trying to describe the UIGEA's details was like trying to describe air.

The main problem was that the UIGEA did not define what was illegal.

Think about that for a moment. The official name of the law is the "Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act", only the law forgot to mention what was illegal. A small oversight.

In short, they passed a law that outlawed, well... something, but they really weren't sure exactly what. Basically, if somebody is willing to call something Internet gambling, then the law would be willing to make it unlawful.

They might as well have called it the "If You Smelt It, You Dealt It Act", or the IYSIYDIA, but I digress.

Anyway, it was this overriding vagueness that has caused everybody from the American banking industry to the Federal Reserve to the House Committee on Financial Services to all question the enforceability of the law and who exactly would be responsible for the enforcement.

Well, ... [More]

Bush Administration Finalizes UIGEA... but is it too late?

I'm starting to think that president Bush (I am hereby no longer capitalizing the word "president" in reference to Bush) is actually Barack Obama's biggest fan.

Why else would he spend the last weeks of his presidency in a constant quest to reach new lows, if not for the assumption that he hopes for Obama to be viewed as "The Best President Ever" in comparison?

Especially since so many of his last-minute partisan policy maneuvers will probably be immediately reversed as soon as Obama assumes control of the presidency.

What am I talking about?

Well, first, let's talk about the bad news...

Yesterday, the Department of the Treasury finalized the rules to implement the UIGEA, in a move that flew in the face of the American banking industry, the newly-elected Democratic majorities in the House and Senate, the international legal gaming community, and the American economy in general. Not to mention simple common sense.

As I mentioned the other day, there is a rule on the books which states that laws finalized more than 60 days before a change in administration can not be canceled by the incoming administration. This explains why the Bushies did everything they could to ... [More]

Bush Administration Takes a Last Kick at the UIGEA

The Bush administration seems to be adopting a new strategy: If you can't go out on top, at least you can go out on the bottom.

As I mentioned a week or so ago, the deadline is looming quickly for partisan bills and policies to be reviewed, ratified and implemented before the new Obama administration comes to power.

The process takes 60 days, so in order to ensure the new administration can not cancel your plans, you need to start the process before November 17th.

And so it was obviously with this in mind that the Bush administration began its latest push to implement the UIGEA, despite the fact that it is opposed by the international community, the American banking industry, the Federal Reserve, the House Committee on Financial Services, and if the recent election is any indication, at least 52.5% of the American people.

According to the Politico, "[William} Wichterman and others backers of the bill, ... [More]

Antigua Approved for UK White List

Finally, some good news for Antigua.

The tiny Caribbean nation has been very publicly battling Goliath for years now in its ongoing and mostly futile dispute with America.

However, it's lesser-known battle for recognition by the UK as a respected online gaming regulator has been equally as futile.

Until now.

The UK Department of Culture, Media and Sport has recently approved Antigua as a member of it's White List.

You might ask, "What is the White List?"

Well, in a measure that borders on protectionism, the UK imposes a ban on advertising from online gambling companies located in jurisdictions that are not on the UK's White List.

Until now, the only countries on the White List were based in the European Union, so it's a very nice plum for Antigua that they were able to attain certification.

The White List certification carries with it a certain degree of automatic respectability as the underlying criteria for certification definitely outlines some rather ... [More]

Spitzer won't be charged

Yeah, I know this is a few days old, but I've been out of the country and blogging is not possible on my Blackberry.

In case you haven't seen it, here's the story.

My thoughts:

1) I guess I'm going to have to change my avatar.

2) It's good to see that his Daddy was able to give him a job. It wouldn't surprise me if this fact probably helps explain Spitzer's easy smugness and hypocrisy. The guy probably never had a minute in his life where he was actually worried about his financial future.

3) Frankly, if he wasn't mis-using public funds, then I don't think he should be charged either. Prostitution should be legalized and regulated (for health issues) anyway.