DNS != Hosting

Linking two companies together based on their DNS host is like linking two people together because they're both in the same phone book. It's almost completely meaningless. UltraDNS have thousands of big companies on their books including Tesco and Amazon and have a decent amount of resilience against dDos so it's no surprise FTP and Stars both use them. I'd be more inclined to link the change with staff churn at PK than anything else.

keep posting keep the hope alive

well, another weekend full of depression, no news, and being busto.

Relax... First open wsop event is monday. Stars still has time to make a big splash!

Monday is a US holiday.

PS will pay us if a few congressman quit making waves against it. They don't want PS to be able to enter the US market on an equal footing to other sites.
So why should PS pay up for something they didn't create if they don't at least get to buy some goodwill with the US Gov? That's my best guess. Negotiations are probably ongoing in this direction.

So let me get this straight china mans super secret source was the part owner of that poker fuse site? Are you ****ing kidding me? And on top of it china man thought the guy worked for stars but he didn't ? All this info was on that Dan druff message board and no one knew ?

It's pretty funny that nobody dug that up before. It's also pretty funny that the guy in question has been posting on here the whole time too.

Shouldnt some of the blame go to Dan Druff as well for "verifying" a worthless source?

That's a pretty bad interpretation of events. For one thing, Hood (he's the pokerfuse guy being referenced) has been actively posting itt and at one point said, "All the specifics of the deal (amount, for what, how far along the road it is) is all rumor."

You guys also seem to have overlooked that those posts are discussing the late April story that Stars was cutting a deal with the DOJ to purchase FTP, not China's "insider info" that an announcement was coming (which wasn't posted until May 1 on Venom).

There is something noteworthy here: The fact that China at one point confuses Hood for PS Nick is kind of reminiscent of the faux Scott Matusow "leak." China ends up looking foolish, but seeing some kind of conspiracy here is a pretty poor read imo.

So... nothing new?

^check back on tuesday

Yeah, C U Next Tuesday, Full Tilt.

Just curious. Why does FTP hype still continue? Chance of resurrection seems really slim, no?

Druff verified that China had a source in the know.

I still believe that, as do most people who are paying attention.

China's source was probably told by Stars that they would make an announcement by today, but it ended up not happening. This can be for one of many reasons, as it's a huge business deal and many things can stall it.

Druff did not indicate that he had insider information himself. He only confirmed that China wasn't fabricating his source.

^oh, hey china man!

I am really hesitant to post in this thread... I just actually sat and read through it for the first time and it took me forever...

First, I don't have money locked up on Full Tilt, I really feel for those of you who do

The only thing I can tell you is that I was present for the conversation China had with his source right around May 1st. I can't speak at all to any of the information that China talked about afterwards because I was not present for any of those conversations. I just happened to be present for the initial conversation where the person who he is referring to as his source said to China that the deal was pretty much done and an announcement would be made around the 3rd week of May.

The only few things I am willing to say is that China's initial post on May 1st was completely accurate to the conversation that was had and that the source is indeed someone who is in the know (inside) to this whole situation.

I will also say that me personally, knowing China as well as I do, trust everything he is saying here.

I'm not trolling or trying to get involved in a long drawn out debate, I am also not looking to take over any role as investigative journalist for this whole story. I just thought I would come in and tell you all what I was present for. I have no more information than what is in this post and there is no shot I will say who China's source is.

I feel you, man. This **** sux. I'd really like the bulk of my net worth and piece of mind back. If it's not going to happen, I'd really like to see the people who ripped us off get...I'll leave it to the imagination (hint: it's not "incarcerated", although that would be partly cool - but not good enough).

Maybe we all died in a huge plane crash a year ago and we all dont even know we are dead...Cos this sure seems like hell to me.

You have it backwards, IGRA wasn't passed to allow tribal gaming, IGRA was passed after the Supreme Court ruled against California's attempt to shut down (Cabazon?) tribal gaming.

The Supreme court ruled that if gambling was allowed in the state - and California allowed lottery - then the tribes were free to offer any type of gaming they wanted on their land since State gambling laws can be viewed as nothing more than 'regulations' by a foreign business.

That decision is the reason Utah rushed to make online gambling illegal after the OLC reversal on the Wire Act, even though there is no licensed gaming in UT, if they could be viewed as 'allowing' any type of gambling in their state by not prohibiting internet gaming, the tribes in their state could begin opening casinos.

It was that court decision which prompted Congress to pass IGRA, which put some limitations on the tribes in return for regional competition revenue compacts with the states, but IGRA didn't alter the Supreme Court's position regarding the application of state gambling laws on businesses outside their regulatory jurisdiction.

To put it simply, the Supreme Court said that state gambling laws are regulatory, and a foreign business as a matter of law can not be in violation of state gaming regulations, so if a foreign business can't violate a state gambling law, and the IGBA requires a business to be operating in violation of state law, they can't be guilty of the federal crime.

You repeat that it's a 'slam dunk' decision because they entered the state to conduct unlicensed gambling, but the IGBA requires that they have operated a significant business of 5 or more people within the state substantially continuous, and players can't be considered part of the business operating in the state.

While PokerStars may at some point have brought employees into the state of NY, I doubt they ever brought 5 and certainly not on any continuous basis.

If anything they could be in violation of federal lottery law, which makes it illegal for a foreign business to offer games of chance extra territorially without a compact regardless of entry into the state, but at that point the matter of the skill involved in the games they offer would likely ensure their acquittal.

As to the jury instruction issue, Ellie and Campos cited multiple cases which were reversed recently by the high court simply because the judge made the decision to answer a question he felt was law but the higher court deemed to be at least in part a question of fact.

In my opinion, if this case made it all the way to deliberation, someone on the jury is going to ask for specific instruction as to whether or not offering online poker to the state of NY is illegal, if the judge says yes, the conviction will likely get thrown out on appeal , if he instructs the jury that it's up to them to decide that, they are likely going to side with the defense - because if the judge can't answer the question, how could PS be expected to know they were breaking the law?

If it were FTP/Tiltware, the jury might conclude that they had simply moved offshore to circumvent the law, but PS was always a foreign (Canadian) business and PS simply continued offering it's services to it's NY customers because the state of NY had not yet exercised their authority to prohibit them from doing so.

The DOJ didn't reduce 7 felony charges to a simple misdemeanor plead after hearing the defense motions because they thought their case was a 'slam dunk', and that was against an American citizen assisting the operation from within a state (UT) with far stricter gambling laws than NY.

One specific concern in their explanation for reducing the charges to the judge was the defense motion to allow a good faith argument which would permit the jury to see that they had sought out and followed the opinions of some of the best lawyers in the country (as opposed to FTP who had their in house hack write a 'poker isn't gambling' narrative).

The real problem for PS is that even if they beat the gambling charges, the conspiracy charges for circumventing the law will stick, so they are still motivated to obtain a deal and get back to raking pots.

Nothing is stopping them, in fact a company recently announced that it had formed the first interstate online poker compact between two tribes (I think one in CA and one in LA) and planned to offer a Cake poker skin within their casinos, so you could legally play from one state against players in another state, plus anyone else on cake.

I just don't think there is much demand for driving to a casino in order to play internet poker, and some people actually suggested it might be some type of investment scam as the press release attempted to confuse people into thinking they could legally play from home through the tribal website.

But what will be interesting is if bills like the one in CA are passed which restrict which tribes can offer gaming off reservation, forces them to follow state regulation, pay a licensing fee and taxes - any of which would require their surrender of sovereignty and therefore be ruled unconstitutional.

Without some amendment to IGRA or other federal legislation, it's hard to imagine any way that a state that already has tribal gaming could offer internet gaming without violating their existing compacts as well as opening the door to any tribe (or foreign business, following the same judicial doctrine) offering internet gaming in the state both tax free and under their own regulation.

The administration keeps suggesting that this is a state issue, and the 10th amendment would suggest that it is, but between the commerce clause and tribal sovereignty issue, the state's aren't currently equipped to settle it, CA had to include language making it a crime to play on an unlicensed site just to ensure they block foreign competition.

My recommendation to congress would be to make a simple amendment to federal lottery laws to include internet gaming, which would require foreign businesses (be it tribal, out of state or offshore) to have a compact allowing it to specifically offer internet gaming with the state in which it wants to offer it.

That way, a small state which didn't want to bear the burden of regulation, but wanted the revenue it generates, could make a compact with a local tribe (or other state) to do the work, large states like CA could regulate their market without surrendering it to foreign (tribal/out-state/offshore) businesses, and states that simply don't want to allow internet gaming would have federal protection.

tamiller, it's nice of you to type all of this up for them, but I think you are making your arguments on some false pretexts.

You keep indicating New York doesn't have specifically strict poker laws, but I really don't think that is true. It has always been my understanding that New York had very intentionally strict laws. I posted the two that I found yesterday.

The second is you keep comparing tribes to foreign governments. A better comparison would be to compare them to competing states.

I think your overall point about a prosecution being pretty vague is correct, and think your premise is what tribes will use to argue for their own rights to offer internet gaming. "If a foreign company (or another state) can offer it on our land than so can we."

I'm starting to get that really bad feeling. This deal is just not happening. It's starting to feel a lot like the GBT thing. The GBT deal was done, remember. The PS deal is done, except for this and that. Well, then it's not done yet. In any deal, that one thing can easily be a deal breaker. The only annoucement we will be getting is that a deal could not be reached.

What the hell are you talking about. He admits it's his source in that thread. Where is the conspiracy??