In no way I am looking for the "sky is falling at Global" crowd to show up to this post, although I bet they will all the same, but this case seems like it could have some interesting impacts for Global in the future.

https://www.geekwire.com/2018/big-fi...s-court-rules/

In particular the following statement by the judge really stands out:

“Without virtual chips, a user is unable to play Big Fish Casino’s various games,”Judge Milan D. Smith of the Ninth Circuit of U.S. Court of Appeals wrote in his opinion Wednesday. “Thus, if a user runs out of virtual chips and wants to continue playing Big Fish Casino, she must buy more chips to have ‘the privilege of playing the game.’ Likewise, if a user wins chips, the user wins the privilege of playing Big Fish Casino without charge. In sum, these virtual chips extend the privilege of playing Big Fish Casino.”

Here's hoping for reasonable discussion!

Thats kinda like those facebook games where you get xxx amount to play with free then you get more unlocked in xxx time. Once you run out you need to buy more to continue playing. You can invite people and unlock more free but yeah seems pretty similar to me.

Well that's never good to hear. I think Global runs a different model and has two currencies, and is based on sweepstakes. If enough of these cases pop-up though, PayPal would likely want to back out.

I'm just sick of the hypocrisy in general and the big companies having control of gaming. There are a thousand bars and "cafes" near me that have video poker/slots that absolutely rape people and I can't play online poker.

For being so liberal, Washington has some of the strictest online gambling laws in the US.

Global does offer games to all 50 states which surprises me, given that a few states have legislated online gambling. Operating on thin ice in some jurisdictions imo. Even the offshore sites don't openly allow players from some states.

After I read the story I thought I was glad I am not playing from WA. It would be interesting to hear from anyone that is and how they feel about the whole thing.

whilst the state of WA has some of the most, if not the strictest online gaming laws/bans in the USA I think all the informed US based players know the reality of the situation and see the writing on the wall. GP's lack of replies to posts like this one linked below I made asking specific q's about regulations and recourse avail to GP if they are in fact regulated also supports the idea that they are operating in a grey market at best.

I know it's a holiday wknd n all but i also feel the lack of activity on this subforum could be/is probably related to GP's lack of participation for the most part with the exception of account or cashier issues, who's that sound like? The site paying for the subforum not replying to posts from people like thayer and marshall28 isnt good for anybody. Im not jumping to conclusions here but.. Side note is swish an undercover mod here like thrash for wpn lol?

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...9&postcount=72

You can see a list of forum mods at the bottom of every forum - just like anyone could (and still can, for now) see thrash in the list on the WPN forum.

Not sure what that link has to do with your question, or how swish even came into your head as a mod of this forum.

the linked post is related to and asking some q's regarding legality etc, its a reply to a quoted post from GP joey stating they're legal. Joey never replied to it that's all.

Re swish, was just curious due to the style and timing of his posts in this subforum, and also the things he chooses to respond to or not. Just reminded me of another situation somewhat so i figured I'd ask that's all.

Hawaii is super liberal and extremely anti gambling.

I just started getting a pop up on pokerstars saying participating with play money chips is against terms of service so I emailed support and got this reply....

Hello David,

Thank you for your email.

Yes, David, unfortunately, participating in play money games is now illegal in the State of Washington.

Due to a recent judicial decision, please be advised that playing from the State of Washington is not allowed and will be considered a violation of our Terms of Service.

In line with our Terms of Service ‘you agree to comply with all country, province, state and local laws when using the service’. We strongly advise that you check and ensure that your use of the service is lawful in your jurisdiction.

We will endeavour to provide further updates as soon as there is further clarity on the situation.

We apologize for any inconvenience caused and thank you for your cooperation.

Regards,

Frank V
Stars Support

Gambling is one of the strangest issues when it comes to partisanship

Swish posts a fair bit here. Quite trolley ldo.

I'm guessing that link is an eg of a post that hasnt been responded to

Just like most liberal politicians, they sell votes/laws to the highest bidder. Right now, the highest bidder is land-based indian tribe casinos.

Yep, this is the response I expect with many options like PokerStars, perhaps Global, maybe others. Not to sideline things too much into crazy places, but what about loot crates in certain video games. It isn't too much of a stretch of imagination to think those could be impacted as well.

Not to get too political but "liberal" isn't really congruent with left wing or Democrat anymore which I think is what you mean. People still use the term "liberal" but clearly a liberal would be in favor of loosening restrictions on most things, classically.

Hawaii and DC are very Democrat-driven states which means they are in favor of loosening restrictions on a few things, and placing great restrictions on others.

California is extremely tight on most personal liberties and yet considered a "liberal" state.

I think this is why so many have a problem fitting in with modern political parties.
How can you be pro gay marriage, but against a guy being able to have a cigarette outside on the sidewalk... or playing a game of poker on his laptop in his kitchen.

We're banning plastic forks here, for God's sake.

Anyway, forget I said anything.

Nailed it! Our state law literally makes all forms of "gambling" illegal before even evaluating the game to be one of skill or one of chance. The U.S. Supreme Court has officially stated Fantasy Football is not gambling but good old Washington eve says that's gambling. Gotta love it. But hey, at least it's raining.

Hawaii's number one travel destination is Las Vegas. By far. This is the reason the state won't legalize gambling it would kill their number one export lol. Or should I say Las Vegas' number one import.

If Hawaii natives are travelling to Vegas to gamble, wouldn't that be an incentive for Hawaii politicians to legalize gambling to keep the $$$ in the state?

I, um...wait, what?

Exactly.

That is an interesting piece. I think one big difference is that on the site in the lawsuit, you purchase the chips and can sell/swap those exact ones out for money. Global you can only but fugazy coins and they cannot be sold or swapped, hence negating the 'something of value' aspect.

Washington is off the charts with their views on gaming and gambling. Most of their legislation is very liberal, yet they are draconian when it comes to poker and gambling. It makes no sense, maybe loss of tax revenue is their catalyst.

Even with sites like Global or PS offering games inside the border, I wonder how the State can go after companies outside their own borders. It seems like that would be extremely difficult. Can they force a site to block IP addresses from the State? How realistic is it for the State to go after a citizen for violating the gaming laws if they play online?

Yep, and I would say Global would have to figure out what to do with this ruling just for allowing people to purchase the Gold Coins and play those at the play money tables, because even this, under that ruling, would be illegal. Global then adds in the $weeps Cash as well, which likely further makes the judges point. Again, I don't think the sky is falling, but its still a very interesting ruling.

It would be very difficult to block Global completely in Washington, or any website like Global, but the state can go to the ISPs that serve WA customers and ask which ones are going to sites like Global and start going after those users.

I am sure there are ways to go after the companies as well, but with it crossing international borders, that might prove to be more work that WA would think it was worth. My guess is PokerStars in particular pulled the plug because they don't want anymore of that "bad actor" labeling they already have. They want to be WAY above board about all of these things if they ever hope to bring Stars real money games back to America.

I think being liberal is like parents (politicians) deciding what is best for their kids (population), because they (politicians) know best.

I do not think anyone has been prosecuted in WA for participating in gambling online, but they have gone after operators.


I think I should send that judge a letter asking them if they feel having a subscription to Netflix is gambling. I feel it is, because I never know if what I am watching is worth my time... and every month I have to rebuy more access, to continue playing.

I think you should become a lawyer, if you aren't one already.

To me they seem very similar, if not the exactly the same based on what the judge said. I would love to hear his response on why the two things would be different.

Anyone remember LiveAce? That was a prior type of sweepstakes type model online poker site that went away some years ago. How is this very different from that model? Unfortunately, Pokerstars is not taking any (legal) chances, so it made this decision in WA state. Reasons like bad actor clauses etc. Pokerstars are trying to avert for a renewed future where (hopefully) online poker expands into regulated poker states.