I have to say I personally find the "US v. ROTW" dispute really depressing to read.
And the worst part is that for the most part it is legally meaningless.
As DoTheMath correctly posted, what really matters isn't what country has a lawsuit, what matters is which country (or countries) have actual control over the assets.
And even then courts in all relevant countries routinely accept
for consideration all foreign claims.
It is a function of US anti-terrorism laws that the DOJ also has extra powers against assets held in a bank that also has assets or business in the US.
But ultimately any bank is going to do what the court sitting down the street tells it to do, no matter how loud the court across the ocean is telling it to do something different. And, despite the anti-terrorism laws, for the DOJ to get
ownership of the assets will still take a judgment by the foreign court where the assets are held. And in most of those courts the DOJ will have no greater standing than any other creditor.
The same is true for the US class action lawsuit. Unique to the US lawsuit, however, are the RICO and other allegations of criminal conduct. This not only allows for 3X damages, it also provides the basis for going after the various shareholders/owners.
I have no knowledge whether any similar action is possible in another country, but at best it seems unlikely in any country that will have jurisdiction over assets given the clearly legal status of online poker in most of those countries. This would also likely lead to a rejection of the 3x damages in some foreign countries (though not the actual damages).
Hence the US lawsuit does have the additional promise for US players/class members of getting some amount of the assets that the alleged responsible owners have in the US (that would otherwise be unavailable to the ROTW anyway). But that is about the only possible difference. In all other relevant circumstances all poker players are most likely to be considered similar "unsecured creditors" of the site.
Also, again in most foreign courts, except with respect to the assets in the US which it already has its hands on, the DOJ is also an "unsecured creditor.
In short, if FTP does not get its miracle investor (or other miracle as yet unrumored) so that it can pay
everyone, it will, one way or another, end up in Bankruptcy/receivorship and courts will begin divvying up its assets.
And the nationality of the creditors at that time will matter almost nothing in the legal dertermination of who gets how much of the remnant assets.
So can't we all just get along?
Skallagrim