Quote:
Originally Posted by MicroBob
I'm concerned about them referring to online-poker as 'illegal' and not at all making the distinction that it's generally not illegal for an individual to play on these sites. People really do hear that stuff and I fully expect my Mom to report that somebody warned her that I better stop playing because they heard on CBS that it's illegal.
I'm also concerned about the tone of the people from these forums not coming across well and sounding like overzealous enthusiasts as they insult 60 Minutes.
But the first part definitely concerns me more because people overreact and can take little snippets of info like that and run with it. My Mom called to warn me about the UIGEA regs that had been finalized a few weeks ago. She left a voice-mail about what she heard on CNN and that it's apparently a big deal and that I have to withdraw all my money right away or else the government would take it. Thankfully I'm more informed on the situation to know that such measures were highly unlikely to be necessary and that everything was fine. But not everyone is as informed or as enlightened as me.
I think the station is responsible when the public comes away with the incorrect impression after seeing the story. They need to be careful with their language so as not to mislead their audience.
Right at the very beginning of the 60 Minutes piece is this inaccurate line. It's illegal to operate a site in the U.S. Just say that. The government is trying to get banks to stop internet-gambling transactions when they see them. Just say that. The banks can't possibly stop them all though because it's difficult to detect. And the customers will continue playing and it's NOT illegal for them to do so. That clarification IS necessary for the story to be accurate. It's disappointing that the language of the story apparently says otherwise.
You can't just say that 'internet poker is illegal' because it simply isn't true for the vast majority of people in the U.S. who have zero intention on setting up a gambling site or on facilitating a transaction. For most people they would just be playing on these sites and there is not language that makes that illegal (by many interpretations) so just blankly calling the whole thing illegal AND leaving the audience with the impression that it's even illegal to play is flat-out inaccurate and I think very inappropriate.
i'm guessing it is illegal.
poker sites set the age at 18 as to when you can play. how many states allow you to gamble/play poker at 18? california, who else?
how many states make it legal for someone to set up a business running a poker game and charging fees and rake? my guess is ZERO
sure, anyone can host a poker game in any state so long as the house takes nothing, but that's not the case here. in a sense pokerstars and all the others are essentially setting up shop in the states and breaking laws. (edit-- or making it possible for the citizens of those states to break a law)
and we have states like Washington that have something concrete on the books.
anyone feel free to correct me where you think i'm wrong.