|
The Southern District of New York (SDNY) Action Against Online Poker Players was a legal action taken by the Department of Justice in an effort to crack down on online poker. The action occurred around June 8, 2009, when the government ordered four banks to freeze over 34 million dollars in payments owed to about 27,000 poker players.〔 According to the Poker Players Alliance, a grass-roots organization for poker players, federal prosecutors ordered Citibank, Wells Fargo and Goldwater Bank and Alliance Bank of Arizona to freeze the accounts of Allied Systems and Account Services.〔 Allied Systems and Account Services are two of the account-management companies that Full Tilt Poker, Absolute Poker, Ultimate Bet and PokerStars use for the disbursement of funds.〔〔 ==Legality of online poker== The legality of online poker in the United States is uncertain. In 2006, the Security and Accountability For Every Port Act was passed in an effort to combat terrorism at United States' harbors. One of the provisions included in the act is known as the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA). This provision prohibits the transfer of funds from a financial institution to an Internet gambling site, with the notable exceptions of fantasy sports, online lotteries, and horse/harness racing. The law makes exceptions for games of skill as opposed to games of luck; thus, opponents of the measure argue, it should not apply to poker.〔 Numerous studies have shown that poker is, in fact, a game of skill. The very existence of thousands of players who were consistent winners proves that. The law, opponents argue, does not address transfer of money to individuals nor does it make online gambling illegal. The only state that has a law explicitly banning online poker is Washington.〔 The federal government holds that playing online is a violation of the Act.〔 Arlo Devlin-Brown, the assistant U.S. attorney for the SDNY, says that the U.S. government can seize the funds "because they constitute property involved in money laundering transactions and illegal gambling offenses."〔 In seizing the money, the federal government did not cite the UIGEA but rather the 1961 law "The Wire Act and Illegal Gambling Business Act."〔 According to the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a think tank "dedicated to free enterprise and limited government",〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=About CEI )〕 the Justice Department has taken the stance that online wagering is prohibited by the Act, "despite the fact that the courts have repeatedly smacked down any attempt to apply the federal Wire Act ... to non-sport related Internet gambling." Nelson Rose, a law professor who specializes in gambling law at Whittier Law School in Costa Mesa, California, said that SDNY's action was "very aggressive, and I think it's a gamble on the part of the prosecutors." Professor Rose indicated that it was unclear as to what law would allow for the seizure of money from individuals as compared to the companies involved.〔 Previous government actions focused on sports betting, not poker and that according to Rose, many courts and legal authorities believe poker is different from sports betting because poker involves a transfer of money between individuals, while sports betting is between an individual and online casino.〔 Account Services lawyer Jeff Ifrah said that the government “has never seized an account that belongs to players who are engaged in what () would contend is a lawful act of playing peer-to-peer poker online.”〔 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Southern District of New York action against online poker players」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|