Ok lets say the DOJ decides to pay out the amount deposited not the amount in the account. What happens to Player X who has made deposits of 25k, withdrawals of 100k, and had a balance of 50k?

If the intention of the DOJ is to discipline players for gambling (which I think is just Forbes spin), then why would they do so by rewarding all players who have gambled over the years and lost by deducting all of their losses and refunding the original deposit?

They are going to make a 'statement' on the ills of online gambling by giving losing players their losses back and taking away from winning players?

I have little concern that they would ever do this.

PokerStars hands DOJ a check, government pockets it?

Those ****ers don't sound like the friendliest bunch of *******s, do they?

Can some of the people 'in the know' PLEASE comment on this? This seems insanely significant and terrifying all at once.

Arguably, they could choose to refund the lesser of your balance and your total deposits. If you lost, tough luck. If you won, you get back your deposit but you don't get to keep your profits.

Can a mod out there close this ****er down please until something concrete is released, I thought it was all over and really dont think I can handle another thread like this.

Well, at least if US players are paid their deposits back, you would think that it shouldn't be classed as income, and therefore not subject to taxation.

Everyone just needs to call the DOJ and let your opinion be known. The DOJ cares just as much about their political image as they do about "seeking justice."

If they know they'll be HUGE political backlash if they don't refund balances and go the way of deposits back...it'll go a long way towards helping our cause.

Great, so I wouldn't have to pay tax on my $50. That makes me feel a whole lot better.

There will be beyond a huge backlash. Riot is more like it. A few media outlets get ahold of the story on how everyone else was paid and US players weren't while the DOJ pocketed the money?

Call the DOJ, let your opinion know, but this ending in anything other than us getting the money is ridiculous...

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...92&postcount=4

Skallagrim's post from the legislation thread

lol, so the precedent is for people to get a fraction of their balances back... great.

At least we know all the money will be there from PS.

Sight... people really interpret stuff every possible wrong way....

They don't look that friendly either.


But I don't think they would go out of their way to screw us, either. Based on their statements and their past actions, I think Preet's office will recommend that we get our money back. And if that happens, I think the afmls will try to follow that recommendation. Why would they go against the recommendation of the attorneys who have actually been working on this case? Obviously, it's still uncertain what will happen and when, but I think our chances are pretty good (knock on wood).