Unfortunately Pokerstars are probably holding most of the cards here (pun fully intended), including point 39. in the claim about transferring money to other players, which if it was not solely for the purpose of facilitating the movement of money, but was for staking a player or paying out an investor then is likely in contravention of Pokerstars' player transfer rules.

"Transferring to other players:

Our transfer tool should only be used to help other players fund their accounts so that they can play at our tables. Any other use of our transfer tool is prohibited and transactions that do not meet this requirement will be rejected.

If you wish to stake other players without playing at the tables yourself, then we recommend that you send funds to these players using a money transfer service outside of our site."

Source: https://www.pokerstars.com/help/arti...oth-xfer/8949/

At face value this means that you can be given money by the player who wants to play, e.g. in cash or by bank transfer, and then transfer the equivalent amount from your Pokerstars funds for them to play.

It appears to prohibit any other form of activity by player transfer, including buying pieces of someone or funding them for a staking agreement. It is a totally dumb set of rules given what happens in the real world of poker but it is in their rules.

Another point likely to favour Pokerstars is, number 43.

43. "Activity and account access from within the United States". This doesn't explicitly say during the comp in question, so perhaps technically any access from within the US even if one isolated log in to check a balance weeks after the SCOOP win might be in breach of their terms.

Also, in my experience of the law and of legal rulings, a company allowing something that is in breach of their terms to happen (because they either didn't notice it or didn't have the resources to police it), doesn't necessarily mitigate it when it happens again at a later date or later period.

The above needs to be a basic principle of law/regulations otherwise it would mean that the lack of policing of something breaking the law/regulation by an organisation up to a certain point in time would then make it okay for the breaking of the law/regulation to happen during a later time when it does eventually become policed and detected.

My non legal, purely human view on this is that Pokerstars are most likely trying it on here. They are a gaming company for starters! (so not exactly the most ethical of businesses), and their own player funds transfer rules are out of touch with reality when it is plastered all over staking forums on the internet that players are routinely breaking the regulations by stating that investors can ship to Pokerstars user name xyz****.

The bottom line IMO is unfortunately that Pokerstars are likely to win this case based on a bunch of BS technicalities that by the strict letter of the law will favour them.

It sucks and I feel bad for Gordon Vayo.

No, the complaint says he used a VPN for a period and that it was malfunctioning. He was in Canada and the VPN said he was in California. Read the whole complaint first.

If true, this is a major failure on the part of the player. It is super easy to verify where your VPN is showing your location. AmayaStars is definitely the devil, but it is not their responsibility to figure out if a VPN is functioning as intended. Sure, they probably overlook this when a player is losing money and police this when a player scores big. If the VPN did say California, case over and Stars wins, imo.

After Black Friday I stayed in Rossarito Beach, just South of Tijuana for a bit. We went to San Diego at least twice a week and on the way back to Mexico they just waived us through almost every time. If not, somebody took a quick look at the passports and then let us in.

Just to make sure, I just checked my passport and there’s not a single stamp or anything else from Mexico in it except from the times I flew from the US to Cancun.

Why would you need a vpn if you play in Canada? And how stupid must you be to use one that shows your location as where you live in the US? oooooh, maybe some ppl are just stupid, Amaya aren't tho

and you got caught bro, if you were really in Canada using a faulty VPN that you knew was faulty from months earlier why didn't he delete it? Because he was in Cal, thats why it was showing Cal? why would you need one in Can seriously?

These lawyers sat there thinking dumb poker player, gimme some $10k stacks , ill sort it

lol

There are many legitimate reasons to use VPNs that have nothing to do with playing poker.

Geolocation is a fickle thing, so I disagree with robert_utk that this is a legitimate reason to withhold rightfully won money. Sometimes your own ISP will route traffic in such a way that you appear to be from somewhere you're not. If it were as open and shut as he thinks, Stars could play gotcha games all day and steal money from tons of people.

Things have changed in the last few years. You can't cross the border by car with just a state issued driver's license. You need a passport, passport card, enhanced drivers license or a Nexus card.

https://www.tripsavvy.com/necessary-...uments-1481719

EDL's are only available in some border states and Nexus cards are obtained for people that frequently cross the border. For the 99.9% of the rest of us you need a passport or a passport card.

Note also if you fly into Canada you must have a valid US passport.

The other interesting aspect to US/Canada immigration different from almost every other country is the lack of "exit immigration". So a US citizen someone could enter into Canada and return back immediately to the US without going through Canadian exit immigration. And its unknown if the US takes a record of its own citizens reentry back to the country.

Vayo got run over by qui Nguyen

Stars think they can run over him too

I think they are right.

Also, since Black friday PS asked to all canadians a documented proof of canadian residence. So I am surprised that they never asked this to US resident playing from Canada.
Not only PS but all others sites make this request now.

Making reverse way is impossible. As a Canadian, recently was in Vegas for one month and try to play Nevada online poker. Give my Vegas hotel adress and it was refused because it's breach their term and conditions. (dont have a proof of reel residence in Nevada.

So even if he win the battle of VPN, still a long way to get back his money.

"Inconceivable !"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3sLhnDJJn0

They keep on using that word, I do no think it means what they think it means.

fwiw, I have not litigated in a long time, but it seems odd to say Stars purposefully availed itself of the benefits of the Central District of California when it requires players to be outside California and most of the US when playing.

As for the Isle of Man, they have a fully functioning courts system and many local counsel admitted as barristers.

I was interested in the Frigate v. Damia ruling on forums, but did not see a copy and do not have Westlaw. It may or may not be distinguishable in light of the TOS. Curious whether anyone has a link to that specific ruling.

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).

See, the following order from the same case... which seems to say that a contract forum clause may be enforced regarding the specified claims, i.e winning under the TOS, with a Plaintiff having to join other claims toinvoke the "no -splintering" rationale for tossing the TOS.

https://cases.justia.com/federal/dis...42717/47/0.pdf

Are you sure that's they wanted from you? I've played on WSOP.com as a visitor many times and never had to prove residence. It would be pretty pointless to have online gaming in NV for locals only.

As it so happens, the geolocation issue I just mentioned is a frequent problem in hotels. It's very common to be unable to play on NV or NJ sites from your hotel because something about the networking in there makes you appear to be in a different state. Could this have been your issue?

I can't imagine a lawyer would waste time on this case and Vayo would be dumb enough to talk to the press about it if he really was VPNing. I would say it's pretty likely he was in Canada and will be able to prove it.

Regardless, this case is gonna be fun to follow. I can't wait to see the inevitable Doug Polk video and DNeg's defense of Stars to the bitter end.

So either he was in Canada and his VPN malfunctioned showing him as being in California?

Or he was in California and it malfunctioned not showing him as being in Canada?

This is such an ignorant post. They do not get to keep any funds they confiscate. They donate them to charity or remit them to the Romanian state budget.

Or was in Alaska and forgot it is part of America.

Pokerstars simply needs to show proof tha he VPN from the states. This does not mean if the vpn sad he was n Cali he was in Cali. There needs to be some other proof needed that Stars needs to show that verifies Vayo was in Cali at any point during the tournament. F they cannot supply evidence then they should pay out.

BTW, is it even possible to sue a private company like stars? always thought they were judge jury and executioner? what they say goes??

Also- as stars is extremely shady I dont think theyd ever screw around with something like this unless they were 100% Sure.

Lastly, I think Gordon Vayo is a clown. For the way he treated Kasouf he deserves this ordeal. I dont respect this guy one bit, Cliif Josephy aswell

Not sure what your source is for your litigation analysis of the burdens of proof and what constitutes a sufficient showing. .... but thanks.

Yes, a private company may be sued.

I don't follow why you think an "extremely shady" person or entity would NOT screw around "unless they were100% sure". I always thought the opposite, that the essence of being "extremely shady" was precisely being willing to "screw around" regardless of whether one was justified or not in doing some action.

Hope PS gets absolutely wrecked here, and he's awarded punitive damages. They have so much power and act like such scumbag bullies in these situation/investigations--I know because they held my $ for 8 mo. before releasing it.

Doens't matter if Gordon played form the US, who cares, it matters whether PS can prove it to the extent to keep his balance. That's what's important here.

They will stall and not reply to emails for months, imo simply to induce stress. They pretend like they're not going to **** you over while baiting you to say the wrong thing. People would be shocked at what they can see on your computer and the info they gather.

I see Pokerstars winning this case, if it ever gets to court.

But if it drags out as these things often do, I can see some uncomfortable things coming out during the process for Pokerstars about how things work in practice for US citizens playing from Canada, Mexico and Costa Rica etc.

The desire for them to prevent that kind of stuff from coming under public scrutiny might encourage them to come to a quick out of court settlement with some kind of gagging clause attached to it.

It also obviously doesn't look great that US players playing from Canada now have at the back of their minds that they might not get paid out a big tournament score unless they live stream the whole tournament while having a beer with a Mountie with the CN Tower constantly in the background.

I suspect that whether he played from the US or not might be somewhat important. Seems strange that some would suggest this is not that significant.

I guess I just don't see Pokerstars wanting to do this to a guy (self declared world renowned or not) who won a significant tournament like that as a "money grab" or a spite move. Those are motivations that make no sense for this company, but that does not mean they are for certain in the right either. The facts should drive this case eventually, and a legal claim telling the story of one side is never quite the full picture of a situation. Will certainly be somewhat interesting to see how it plays out.

Pretty sure if he wins in court they will just increase the rake to make up for the lost revenue

1. Star's is a public company. 2. Did you really just ask if it's possible to sue a private company?

You also can't cross the border with Joe Sebok with you, correct?