Gordon Vayo Sues PokerStars For $700k SCOOP Prize - Poker News

Apparently Stars believes that Gordon Vayo may have been VPNing from the US when he took down the 2017 SCOOP Main Event. It doesn't appear they're saying that he definitely did, just that it's "not inconceivable" that he may have. Vayo claims he was in Canada and can prove it.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/darrenh.../#76189ca21585

Quote:

"I am deeply disappointed it has come to this, but feel that taking legal action is necessary to protect my rights as well as those of other PokerStars players who are in my situation, but may not have the means to get their message out and protect themselves against the unwarranted bullying tactics that I have experienced during this ordeal," says Vayo.

He's also claiming that PokerStars has a habit of welcoming Americans to play on their site (in other regions, of course), and then pulling the rug out like this as soon as they make a big score. Has anyone heard of other instances of this happening?

Quote

05-08-2018 , 02:53 PM

angeles

old hand

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 1,942

site gets worse by the day

Quote

05-08-2018 , 03:08 PM

Wide_Nine

enthusiast

Join Date: Nov 2017 Posts: 64

Forbes took the article as well.

All this does is make it look a lot worse for Stars and the fact it is on Forbes and regarding a USA players again is a knock on any chance Stars will get legalized federally in the States.

Quote

05-08-2018 , 03:12 PM

pmarrsouth

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,123

Should be easy enough to solve, like the other instance where Stars seized the funds. The US government knows when you are in the US, as presumably does the Canadian government. A US citizen can easily get proof of if there were in the US or not by requesting, in writing, to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Maybe something like this exists from the Canadian government too

I am sure that any lawyers that Gordon hired has had him go through this

I wonder if his internet connection died during the event in question and he had to tether to his cell data, which is presumably a US phone. He would then have a US IP during this time. Presumably since he was already in the tournament, it would continue letting him play, but not register for anything else while on this IP

Quote

05-08-2018 , 03:27 PM

Wilbury Twist

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 6,153

Here is a PDF to the actual complaint filing, if anyone is interested:
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-co...oker-Stars.pdf

Quote

05-08-2018 , 03:34 PM

Joe Pulaski

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 8,346

honestly, i'd have to imagine he was vpn'ing just because it'd be so trivially easy to prove he was in canada for real.

Quote

05-08-2018 , 03:40 PM

Sect7G

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,234

Did Stars pay all subsequent finishers a bump up the pay ladder? Of course not.

They seize this money and millions more every year as a revenue stream.

Gl to the plaintiff... And even if he loses Stars will then have to pay the funds to other cashers.

Quote

05-08-2018 , 03:44 PM

MagikarpFTW

veteran

Join Date: Jan 2015 Posts: 2,190

For us non-Americans, can somebody explain the procedure when crossing the US-Canadian boarder as US citizen? Because here in Europe I could travel to most countries without ever showing someone my ID.

Quote

05-08-2018 , 03:45 PM

coltranedog

grinder

Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 588

All he would have to do is go go the US customs and request his entry and exit status. Like someone said trivially easy to prove.

Quote

05-08-2018 , 03:46 PM

#10

BigJulie22

newbie

Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wilbury Twist

Here is a PDF to the actual complaint filing, if anyone is interested:
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-co...oker-Stars.pdf

Question:

If Vayo was in Canada at the time he played, and if Pokerstars/Rational is not operating in the US, then why does his lawsuit allege violations of California law, such as an alleged violation of California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 for unfair/unlawful business practices in California?

Quote

05-08-2018 , 03:58 PM

#11

pmarrsouth

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,123

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Pulaski

honestly, i'd have to imagine he was vpn'ing just because it'd be so trivially easy to prove he was in canada for real.

complaint mentions that he used VPNs the entire time!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sect7G

Did Stars pay all subsequent finishers a bump up the pay ladder? Of course not.

They seize this money and millions more every year as a revenue stream.

You are well aware that they donate such seizures to charity

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagikarpFTW

Depends on how you cross, but there are records for everything as its a hard (physical) border. There are little/no borders within Europe, sometimes you get asked for docs on a train when crossing a country, but its rare

Quote

05-08-2018 , 04:05 PM

#12

robert_utk

Not From the UK

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 4,822

Yeah, if you enter the US legally, there is a record, and you can not do so without a passport. The problem might be that Canada does not require a passport for entry and may not keep a record of every person who enters. So, he may have no official record of leaving the US, only when he returned.

This is how the Canada border works, or am I totally off here? Does every car at the border have to show passports to get back into the US, I was under the impression all entries are monitored....

Quote

05-08-2018 , 04:49 PM

#13

Expedient

newbie

Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 16

lol at "Mr. Gordon" first paragraph on pg 5. Who is this lawyer?

Quote

05-08-2018 , 04:50 PM

#14

JackRandall

old hand

Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,967

More rake is better, so less prize money must be even better

Quote

05-08-2018 , 04:59 PM

#15

bgy333

journeyman

Join Date: Jan 2018 Posts: 250

sooo obv.

he was caught after the scoop win, they allowed him to transfer $90,000 to other players before freezing his account.

jus because you win scoop in CAN bro doesn't mean u can vpn from the US?

should spend some dat $700k on a better vpn

Quote

05-08-2018 , 05:05 PM

#16

Bobo Fett

Carpe Diem

Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 56,895

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagikarpFTW

Similar to just about every other border crossing in the world that isn't part of something like the European Union - identification needs to be provided, questions may be asked about why you're coming into the country, how long you're staying, what you're bringing with you, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by robert_utk

I think there are alternatives like enhanced driver's licence/ID, etc., but some form of ID will need to be shown, and I think is always logged. So in theory, there should be some kind of record of border crossings, but there's always the non-zero possibility that an exception is made, errors, computer glitches, etc.

And there's also the possibility that one (or both) of the customs agencies won't share that information. I'm not sure if they are legally obliged to or not. But I think they usually (and perhaps always) will, and if it were me, I'd certainly be making the request.

Quote

05-08-2018 , 05:08 PM

#17

Monteroy

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 16,729

Whoever wrote that complaint really, REALLY loves the expression "gin up." Perhaps that is a particularly effective legal term, although usually it is offset by stating that the plantiff is a world renowned professional player over and over again, because nothing makes a judge swoon quite as much as that.

I am not a lawyer. I do not play one on TV. I think someone with less qualifications than that wrote this legal document, and truth be told - after reading it - I basically thought that he had to be using a VPN.

Hopefully nobody will post a picture of him playing a live event in the US the same day like happened to that other guy in Florida who won a lot online and complained here about it being taken.

If he did nothing wrong, then I hope he wins, and any American who is a "part time Canadian" should know to properly document that they are in Canada every day they play, particularly for these stakes. At a bare minimum he should insist that his passport get stamped every time he crosses each border, and frankly he should do a lot more then that every day while in Canada.

Quote

05-08-2018 , 05:15 PM

#18

bugsino

stranger

Join Date: May 2018 Posts: 2

As a Canadian I learned that you need not only to been physically in Canada (for US) but also a proof of residence in Canada such cable/electricity bills or home buy/renting contract . Just stay in hotel,at a friend or rent for one month is not enough. May be this was the issue.

Quote

05-08-2018 , 05:19 PM

#19

pmarrsouth

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,123

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monteroy

...and truth be told - after reading it - I basically thought that he had to be using a VPN.

I read it that Gordon did indeed use a VPN a lot of the time while playing

Quote

05-08-2018 , 05:21 PM

#20

Rich Checkmaker

banned

Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,441

Quote:

Ironically, to this day, Defendant continues to tout Mr. Gordon as the winner of the SCOOP tournament on the PokerStars.com site, and continue to profit off of its use of
Mr. Gordon’s name, which is held in high regard in the poker community.

https://www.pokerstars.com/en/blog/o...?no_redirect=1

Quote:

In the end, Defendant not only refused to pay Mr. Vayo what it owed him, but also threatened to counter-sue Mr. Vayo for breach of its Terms of Service if Mr. Vayo did not comply with a purported “exclusive venue” provision contained in the PokerStars.com Terms of Service. This provision purports to require all users of the PokerStars.com site to bring any legal claims they might wish to assert against Defendant, including for Defendant’s violations of its own Terms of Service, on the
Isle of Man – a small island in the Irish sea between Great Britain and Ireland, which is often used as a tax haven by corporations, and which employs an archaic sui generis system of law called “Manx law.” In this way, Defendant purports to shield itself
from any practical or realistic possibility of being sued – thus allowing Defendant to violate its own Terms of Service with impunity against any PokerStars.com user that does not have the means or wherewithal to file and litigate a lawsuit on the Isle of
Man. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the Isle of Man venue provision contained in Defendant’s Terms of Service is unreasonable and unconscionable and, as a result, is null and void. See Frigate Ltd. v. Damia, No. C 06-04734 CRB, 2007
WL 127996 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2007) (holding Isle of Man venue provision unreasonable and void).

Quote:

14. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332(a) and 1367. Plaintiff asserts federal claims under the Lanham Act. In addition, as stated in paragraphs 17 and 18 below, for purposes of diversity
jurisdiction, Plaintiff is a citizen of the State of California and Defendant is a citizen of the Isle of Man. The amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000.00 exclusive of interest and costs.
15. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it has purposefully availed itself of the benefits of this forum by committing wrongful acts which have had direct effects in this District, including regarding the primary conduct that forms the basis of the allegations herein.
16. Venue is proper in the Central District of California pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) and (3).

Quote:

43. Five (5) days later, on August 5, 2017, Defendant notified Mr. Vayo, for
the first time, without explanation, that “it came to our attention that there has been
account access and activity from within the United States.”

Quote:

54. After months of stonewalling by Defendant, Mr. Vayo hired legal counsel to address the matter with Defendant, thus, adding insult to injury by forcing Mr. Vayo to incur legal fees to simply get paid what he was owed.
55. Mr. Vayo’s counsel sent a letter to Defendant on September 27, 2017, to which Defendant’s in-house counsel responded on October 4, 2017. This October 4 letter was the first time that Defendant provided any details at all regarding its allegations against Mr. Vayo. Specifically, Defendant alleged that there were
connections on Mr. Vayo’s account originating from the United States between March and July 2017 totaling “56,000 tournament hands,” including the SCOOP tournament.
56. Mr. Vayo’s counsel responded on October 10, pointing out that between March and July 2017 Mr. Vayo played only about 8,800 tournament hands in total, thus, any information suggesting the he played 56,000 tournament hands during this period from the United States was verifiably false. Mr. Vayo’s counsel demanded that Defendant produce the information on which it was basing its allegations.
57. On November 14, 2017, Defendant responded by letter from outside counsel, attaching a chart listing 54 alleged connections by Mr. Vayo originating from within the U.S. All but nine (9) of the alleged connections were between March 24 and May 18, 2017, with the remainder occurring in late July 2017. Notably, none of
the alleged connections were during Mr. Vayo’s play during the SCOOP tournament. Moreover, this was the first time that Defendant provided Mr. Vayo any purported “evidence” regarding Mr. Vayo’s alleged U.S. access of the site.
58. Mr. Vayo’s counsel responded on December 4, 2017, pointing out the numerous deficiencies in Defendant’s list. Among other things: the alleged U.S. connections overlapped entirely with the period of the VPN malfunction in Spring 2017 that Mr. Vayo had disclosed to Defendant less than two (2) hours after they originally raised the issue of U.S. contacts. In addition, all of the ISP addresses on Defendant’s list in fact traced to Canada, not to the U.S. Further, while Defendant listed the “Wi-Fi Region” for all of the connections as “California,” without further explanation, Mr. Vayo pointed out that he did not access the site via Wi-Fi, but used a hard-lined connection to his computer. Moreover, numerous of the alleged U.S. logins for Mr. Vayo’s account occurred on the same days as logins to his account from
Canada, which Defendant did not contest, and it defies logic that Mr. Vayo was logging into his account from both Canada and the United States several times a day on successive days. This too pointed to the VPN malfunction that Mr. Vayo had previously and immediately disclosed to Defendant. Also in this correspondence, Mr. Vayo provided even further documentation regarding his activities in Canada during the relevant time period.
59. Defendant responded on January 15, 2018 – a month and a half later – not with further evidence or explanations of the deficiencies in its purported evidence, but by asserting that Mr. Vayo’s documentation of his whereabouts was insufficient
because he had not proven that it was “inconceivable” that he had “travelled to the US and was present in the US on May 22” when he won the SCOOP tournament.
60. Defendant made this assertion despite the fact that Defendant itself did not even allege that there were any out of jurisdiction logins to Mr. Vayo’s account during the SCOOP tournament, and despite the fact that Mr. Vayo had submitted uncontroverted evidence – which Defendant did not contest – that he was in fact in Canada on the first two days of the SCOOP tournament, on May 20 and 21, and it would have been virtually impossible (not to mention inexplicable) for him to travel to the U.S. in the middle of an active, intensive, major tournament that required nearly
around-the-clock play and focus, leaving time for only brief periods of rest and nourishment.
61. On April 7, 2018, Defendant’s counsel sent Mr. Vayo a letter stating that its investigation had concluded and that, because Mr. Vayo had failed to produce evidence sufficient to “rebut” Defendant’s suspicion that Mr. Vayo may have been in the U.S. during a portion of the SCOOP tournament, his account would remain frozen and he would not be paid.

Quote:

96. Plaintiff is further entitled to treble damages for Defendant’s willful conduct, as provided by the Lanham Act.

Quote:

Treble damages, in United States law, is a term that indicates that a statute permits a court to triple the amount of the actual/compensatory damages to be awarded to a prevailing plaintiff. Treble damages are a multiple of, and not an addition to, actual damages.

Quote:

109. Defendant has used Plaintiff’s name and identity in order to promote, advertise and market the PokerStars.com site. In particular, Defendant has promoted, advertised and marketed the PokerStars.com site by holding out to the public on the
PokerStars.com website and blog over the past year that Mr. Vayo was the winner of the SCOOP tournament in question, using his famous name to promote and draw users to the site, when in fact behind the scenes Defendant had frozen Mr. Vayo’s account and alleged that he was not in fact the legitimate winner of the tournament in question.
110. The aforementioned appropriation and use of Plaintiff’s name and identity were to Defendant’s commercial advantage.
111. Plaintiff did not consent to such appropriation and use of his name and identity by Defendant.

Quote:

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment
against Defendant as follows:
A. For an award of direct and consequential damages in an amount to be ascertained at trial but in no event less than $692,460.00, plus interest thereon at the legal rate of ten percent (10%) per annum from the date of Defendant’s breach;
B. For punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be ascertained at trial;
C. For restitution and disgorgement of Defendant’s ill-gotten gains as a result of Defendant’s violations of law, in an amount to be ascertained at trial;
D. For treble damages pursuant to the Lanham Act;
E. For prejudgment interest as allowable by law;
F. For preliminary and permanent injunctive relief;
G. For Plaintiff’s costs of suit;
H. For reasonable attorneys’ fees; and
I. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

I just read the whole complaint and I hope the court sides with Vayo and give him everything he's asking for.

Last edited by Rich Checkmaker; 05-08-2018 at 05:39 PM.

Quote

05-08-2018 , 05:29 PM

#21

Wilbury Twist

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 6,153

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigJulie22

Wow, good question... on top of that, the Western Division of the Central District covers San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura and L.A. counties. (The Inland Empire to the Nevada border is the Eastern Division, while Orange County is the Southern Division).

I've never really understood how venue/jurisdiction works with these, though. For example, do certain districts handle certain types of federal actions?

Hopefully, one of the lawyer types on 2+2 can answer this.

EDIT: oh never mind, I see it now:

Quote:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
14. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332(a) and 1367. Plaintiff asserts federal claims under the Lanham Act. In addition, as stated in paragraphs 17 and 18 below, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction, Plaintiff is a citizen of the State of California and Defendant is a citizen of the Isle of Man. The amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000.00 exclusive of interest and costs.

15. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it has purposefully availed itself of the benefits of this forum by committing wrongful acts which have had direct effects in this District, including regarding the primary conduct that forms the basis of the allegations herein.

16. Venue is proper in the Central District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) and (3).

Quote

05-08-2018 , 05:29 PM

#22

Sect7G

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,234

Pmarrsouth i'm not aware of anything. I may have read that they do bur I don't see how much is given... How much is collected nor the tax write offs.

On top of that I'd much rather Amaya didn't give to charity with players mobey but gave it back to more victims of cillusion. If they want to donate then let it come out of rake... The source where it's supposed to come from. As I said #revenuestream

Quote

05-08-2018 , 05:34 PM

#23

pmarrsouth

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 4,123

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sect7G

Pmarrsouth i'm not aware of anything.

thats clear

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sect7G

On top of that I'd much rather Amaya didn't give to charity with players mobey but gave it back to more victims...

not just for collusion, but I agree with something like to more victims of TOS infringements

Quote

05-08-2018 , 05:36 PM

#24

SrslySirius

Animated Character

Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 4,357

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Checkmaker

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment
against Defendant as follows:
A. For an award of direct and consequential damages in an amount to be ascertained at trial but in no event less than $692,460.00, plus interest thereon at the legal rate of ten percent (10%) per annum from the date of Defendant’s breach;
B. For punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be ascertained at trial;
C. For restitution and disgorgement of Defendant’s ill-gotten gains as a result of Defendant’s violations of law, in an amount to be ascertained at trial;
D. For treble damages pursuant to the Lanham Act;
E. For prejudgment interest as allowable by law;
F. For preliminary and permanent injunctive relief;
G. For Plaintiff’s costs of suit;
H. For reasonable attorneys’ fees; and
I. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

Damn, he's trying to get them for millions. Guess I undersold this in the thread title.

Quote

05-08-2018 , 05:37 PM

#25

Monteroy

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 16,729

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sect7G

That is a point of debate that is not really related to this topic. Despite the complaint trying to "gin up" the concept that Stars uses this approach as an income stream while oiling their mustaches, the reality is that things like this are not what Stars wants to do - it looks bad regardless of who is right or wrong.

I doubt a judge will be that impressed with the approach used in that complaint, as they see that type of eye rolling language used all the time, and it is just one side of the story. In the end it should come down to the evidence both sides produce. Call me naive, but I suspect if this person truly had lock solid evidence of his presence in Canada (which anyone in that situation should maintain) then this would never happen. Much of that complaint feels like a XXXX site stole my money thread where a lot of data is not provided initially.

I will be surprised if he wins this, but if he does (by providing the court with proper evidence) then he should be congratulated for going through the process for that outcome.

Quote

Page 1 of 18

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 11

Last

Post Reply Subscribe

...

Page 1 of 18

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 11

Last