Patiently waiting for user "Gl0balisfake" to come in and weigh in.

It does more than that which is why I linked it. It not only makes it illegal to transmit money to and from gambling sites. It defines what constitutes gambling.

In this subchapter:
(1)Bet or wager.—The term “bet or wager”—
(A) means the staking or risking by any person of something of value upon the outcome of a contest of others, a sporting event, or a game subject to chance, upon an agreement or understanding that the person or another person will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome;
(B) includes the purchase of a chance or opportunity to win a lottery or other prize (which opportunity to win is predominantly subject to chance


Sweeps cash has an even value to US dollars making it gambling if you were to wager in a contest like poker.

This would put PayPal in violation of the UIEGA.

Would you agree so far?

Nope. I'm not versed enough in the law to know if Global's interpretation of it is correct or not, and at this point I'm not inclined to believe that you are either. Clearly they believe in their interpretation enough that they've spent millions of dollars on their product, and Paypal believes in it enough to risk some potentially major consequences - I'll go with their interpretation over yours until someone can convince me why you're right.

And given that you're using nothing more than your interpretation of the law to decide that Global is providing a different game than most think, you probably shouldn't be stating it (your opinion) as fact.

I posted the law for you to read yourself. I posted what it says not my interpretation. It is there plain as day. There is no trick.to this. You have been asking for law and I give it to and you are still like an ostrich with it's head in the sand. This law is the reason they are running a sweepstakes. With a sweepstakes what they are doing is legal and makes funding with PayPal legal but it has to be a sweepstakes and not just in name only or else they run foul of the FTC and other federal agencies as well as various state laws. In all the post here we have posted items from their rules posted on their website, dug through corporate financial records and posted the relevant information, as well posted what makes a sweepstakes a sweepstakes. The company itself ignores direct questions and post a random statement about.its RNG which hasn't been questioned as well as calling us trolls for even bringing this up. You can't even download hand histories like every other poker site because they are trying to be as vague as possible and hide the fact that it is a very well done fake They market it as poker, they post here in a poker forum, they even post like it is real poker.on their Facebook page which is the biggest problem.with them. So tell me what would you consider enough proof and since when in the world of online poker with the history of.cheats and fraud have gotten to a point where sites are so easily trusted? Shouldn't​ the website that shows up on the scene making a huge claim about legal online poker in the US using only PayPal for transactions be held to a high standard with such an outrageous claim?

This, to me, is where your case breaks down, and was the law I was asking you to post. Not Wiki links, or other's definitions, but the law that makes it clear a legit poker game offered the way they are running their site could not qualify as a sweepstakes.

Goldnsquid,

Do you really think your interpretation of the law is more accurate than the legal counsels for Global Poker and PayPal? You have no legal expertise; get your head out'yer..

The legal definition of a sweepstakes is

A sweepstakes is a legal contest or game where anything of value is distributed by lot or chance.

https://definitions.uslegal.com/s/sweepstakes/

BoBo; please see post 237 in this thread. All of the information you are looking for is contained in the linked report that I reposted from a dewb. I am sorry that you will have to read the information yourself, but it is all there. This is information coming straight from VGW Holdings. This clearly shows the sweepstakes business they are engaged in, as well as the sweepstakes business they were expanding into at the time. This document clears up the whole laws concerning sweepstakes.

True poker has a special distinction in the laws of the US as that it is considered gambling if 'consideration' is given by participants to win something of value. The only way poker cannot be viewed as gambling is if no consideration was paid by the participants. In a scenario where no consideration is given to participate in a poker game, it is possible to have a game in which prizes are awarded, but the game has to fall under another set of guidelines. As Gold pointed out, virtual currency does not qualify as no consideration given by participants in the eyes of the US. Virtual currency is successfully used in online sweepstakes games that are legal in many states; however, this virtual currency concept does not apply to poker as poker is considered gambling in the US; whereas, sweepstakes are not considered gambling if conducted according to a strict set of standards. All of these standards are contained in the company information linked in post 237.

I have been reading bits of this thread so pardon if this has already been addressed, but if it is a sweepstake system then how come you have to purchase something to enter? I believe sweepstakes have to be free to enter? I didn't look up the law or anything though, but I know the mc donalds monopoly that always runs says that on all their damn commercials.

If op is correct just shove every hand and pick up that fold equity.

You are correct. Global poker will give you free sweeps cash if you send them postcards just like any other sweepstakes. It is buried in the official rules

I do not think you understand what we are saying. We are saying they have interpreted the US sweepstakes laws correctly and they are offering a legal US sweepstakes game. We are not saying they are not offering a legal US sweepstakes game, as they are doing so.

What we are saying is that they are not offering a real poker game. They are offering a sweepstakes poker game. So we have shown they are offering a legal sweepstakes game, and provided the information from their own company documents on how they are doing it.

So I guess my question to you, and the others, is show me the laws or have Global Poker explain how they are offering a real US money poker game given the laws in the US. Because all of the information says they are offering a poker sweepstakes game, and technically I can find no where they are claiming to offer a real US money poker game.

In short, your confusion is what type of game is being played at Global Poker, and you are trying to fit a game (real US money poker) into Global Poker that they themselves are not even promoting much less hosting.

That is no help whatsoever. Don't worry about it, I know you don't have an exact law that has helped you draw your conclusions; as the link you posted says: "Federal legislation and state laws govern sweepstakes.", so there isn't even going to be one law that applies.

I tried that link when you posted it, and as someone else mentioned at the time, it wasn't working. Now it is, and there's no way I'm wading through that entire thing to try and find out where you're getting your interpretation from. I did have a look at the page you suggested (64 I believe), and it certainly doesn't lead me to the absolute conclusion that it does you.

Look, I sort of get where you guys are coming from. What you have suggested would more than likely qualify them as a sweepstakes. However, that doesn't mean it's the only way it can be done. Their rep has said their RNG is being certified, which obviously wouldn't be the case if they didn't have one as you're suggesting. So, if you're correct and they have to use no RNG (or have one that just randomly picks a winner), then their rep is lying. Or their rep is telling the truth, and they have another way they (and their lawyer, their investors, and Paypal) believe makes them a sweepstakes.

But until you can post something in clear language in sweepstakes law and/or their prospectus that makes it apparent that a gimmicked game is the only legal option, I'm still going to be of the belief that this is your opinion based on your interpretation of the prospectus, the law, their site, etc., and not fact. Therefore, I'll also still be of the belief that you shouldn't be stating opinion as fact.

And I'll finish by saying that I'm OK with us disagreeing on this and having to leave it that way. After all, I'm the "2+2 Ad Man" and therefore likely seen as biased - I'm not the guy you want to convince (although of course I'd want to know the truth). But I think you're going to need something a lot clearer to convince most people. So far, you're mostly gathering those who thing the game is rigged/gimmicked in some way and are able to point to this as "proof" that it is.

Until Global comes in here and clarifies things (and not that snarky, condescending rep) I'll still have doubts, but in meantime I'm playing like it's real poker and winning so I don't give ****. It's starting to sound like a bunch of flat earthers in here (and I conspiratard with the best of 'em). There's zero proof it's not legit although it can feel like it. On the other hand there's zero proof it is legit so LOL. It is insane we can't find out what kind of shuffler they use and the fact that it wasn't verified before launching is ridiculously incompetent.

BoBo: your position is duly noted and appreciated. Please note, they do need a RNG to pick the winner of the sweepstakes, and yes they would likely need to have it certified.

Page 62 of the link is where they discuss the laws of US sweepstakes in relation to their casino offerings. These same laws apply to all sweepstakes. Prize and Chance are the key components of their games and consideration is the variable they eliminate to avoid hosting an illegal lottery.

Prize, Chance, and Consideration make up the guidelines for sweepstakes. Games without Chance are called Contests and must met a separate and more elaborate set of criteria. By definition, Chance has to be weighted to a random winner versus a skilled Contest. They speak of no chance games in their documentation.

Without Chance, they could not qualify the game of poker as sweepstakes as the US has already deemed this game as gambling if consideration is given to participate in the game. As a result, all of their games contain prize and chance with chance being defined as a completely random winner. Dealing of poker cards does not qualify poker as a game of chance. according to the US government.

One thing Paypal forgot to do in their vetting process of VGW was make sure this supposed sweepstakes they are legally operating was verified/certified. Welp. GG NH Global and your $250,000 bond with Paypal.

Also overlooked during the vetting process by Pokernews and 2+2. Advertising to your poker players a site that can't confirm the cards they are dealing are random.

Everyone shove every hand so we make all the money from folding their 50/50 hands even when statistically wrong (89 vs kk hand mentioned earlier). I'm assuming the site just half the time gives the money to the losing hand in this case. Let's get rich doing this stray /end thread. Either get rich and quit bitching or shut the **** it

Been lurking this thread for a while now, really interesting topic and give more insight on sweepstakes..I know perhaps some already ask you this,but let say what you guys said is true -- GP is fake,what happened next?black Friday all over again for player there?and what your gain from this/motives(telling GP is fake,and go all the way with research and etc).. I do still believe there's people that really care about others (including in poker forum)like you guys..cheers

Ps. Never saw how GP looks like or play there and dont care

You are correct in your conclusion. If you read that specific page, simple comprehension says they are talking about Chumba Casino and not real money poker, although they do mention they are working with 'real money specialists' in another subsection. The problem is some people are looking at bits and pieces of the prospectus and then using layman's definitions and/or understanding of what things mean.

A prospectus lays out specific definitions as to what various words mean. If they say that a 'sweepstakes' is defined herein as glitter farting unicorns, that is what it means. To take a general understanding or definition as to what it means in reading it is pointless.

In being very specific, it clearly discusses the sweepstakes and social casino aspects pertaining to Chumba Casino. Since you cannot access Global Poker through Chumba Casino, there is zero conflation in discussing one with the other. It is very clearly written out if you know how to read a prospectus. They are written by attorneys for attorneys.

There is also no US law against gambling per se, although US law does define it. State laws are the issue. The various wire Acts that pertain to gambling mostly fall behind the UIGEA. That pertains to both gambling and games of chance. Poker does not fall under its umbrella based on a ruling from Judge Weinstein declaring both poker and fantasy sports as skill based games. If Adelson and the diminshing clown car occupants supporting RAWA have their way, the loophole will be closed.

With Judge Weinstein's interpretation, convictions were vacated and/or appealed and overturned. He set precedence, the foundation of US law. For another judiciary finding to reverse it, they would have to successfully argue that there is no skill involved in either. That is not going to happen.

There are other models that use the sweepstakes guise as a means of allowing real poker, that too is precedence as to understanding what the intention is at VGW. A layman's definition provided by Merriam-Webster has no place in reading a prospectus.

Where Global is lacking is in the T&C. They seem to have copied and pasted from the Chumba Casino onto the Global Poker side or haphazardly pieced it together. Some of the terms have no bearing or have been outright violated on the poker site. It says that no cash prize can exceed $5,000. Well, there isn't a prize on the poker site and there have been pots won much larger than the 5K cap that is claimed.

A prospectus states it cannot be copied or read in part, for just the reasons that some are discussing here. It is an 'in whole' document and only relevant in its entirety and without any outside discussion or understanding taken into account. It specifically discusses the definitions of sweepstakes, social sweepstakes, etc... and what they pertain to by meaning. They are tied to the Chumba Casino, throughout the prospectus. Since Global Poker is not accessible through the Chumba Casino, none of that discussion has any ties, associations, or bearing on the Global brand, model, or game.

Your desire for someone to show a law or proof of any claim will go unfulfilled. The absolute closest anyone can come to it is having a strong feeling about it.

VGW could and should distinguish between Chumba and Global on their own website, from a governance perspective. They should also update their T&C on the Global site since some of them have nothing to do with the poker site and could technically disallow and large pot won over $5,000.

No, that would not happen. If for some reason the legal counsel at PayPal was not as 'knowledgeable' as some of the people posting here and did not do their due diligence....the bond would not apply. The bond is posted as security against wrongdoing by VGW. If PayPal decided to not properly investigate the documentation and disrupted business for VGW because of it, they would be liable for damages. VGW would not lose their bond for any at fault action by PayPal.

Any outlet that accepts advertisers is not liable for misinformation, intentionally or otherwise, on behalf of the advertiser unless you can prove they knew in advance that they were aware of it. It is no different than claiming culpability for the side bar ads.

I don't care what Global is doing, but this thread is epic.

NY sweepstakes law is why the ToS say that.


The New York Department of State is the filing office for Games of Chance registerable under Section 369-e of the New York State General Business Law. In order to be registerable, a game of chance must:

• promote consumer products or services
• have a total prize value in excess of $5,000
• determine a winner by chance
• require no consideration for entering the Game of Chance
The completed Games of Chance Registration, together with a certificate of deposit or surety bond for the total prize amount and the rules and regulations must be forwarded to the New York Department of State, Division of Corporations, State Records and Uniform Commercial Code, One Commerce Plaza, 99 Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12231. The fee for filing the Games of Chance Registration is $100, made payable to the New York Department of State.

Within 90 days after completion of the game of chance, a listing of the names and addresses of each winner of every prize having a value of more than $25, along with a description of the prize won and the date when the prize was delivered, must be filed with the New York Department of State.

Their rules page says it is max of 5K prize. If that is the case, then they would violate their own terms every pot that is greater than 5K if it were a sweepstakes. It even goes on to tie it into Chumba somehow. It isn't well written or explained. They discuss the odds of winning, when the sweeps cash expires, and a minimum amount of times the sweepstakes must be played. None of those points really apply to the Global site. It seems the 'sweepstakes' aspect is that individuals can send off a postal request for sweeps dollars. They also discuss various contests that ask questions and award a prize/s to randomly chosen winners. It doesn't seem that very much of the T&C applies to poker and it clearly is not intended to apply.

It is very easy to see how it can be misleading.

Basically how the whole operation of VGW/Global is doing business. Deception and misleading their players.