Maybe The US Can Ignore Antigua, But EU Is Another Story
from the high-stakes dept
Antigua can complain all it wants about the US blocking its online gambling industry, but its threats are dulled by the fact that Antigua doesn't represent a major trading partner. So, other than setting up some sort of allofmp3.com-style music site, there's not much it can do to retaliate. But now the EU is jumping into the fray, complaining that the US' move to block online gambling sites contravenes WTO agreements. And unlike Antigua, the EU does have serious retaliatory weapons at its disposal because it's such an important trading partner. Unfortunately for online gambling enthusiasts, the EU isn't trying to get the ban overturned, but it's exploring how it can be compensated for lost business. Most likely, it will seek to slap certain US goods with high tariffs. An economist would say that retaliatory trade barriers don't make any sense and that they essentially amount to cutting off one's nose to spite their face. However, that's never stopped countries from engaging in this practice in the past. Given that the WTO is likely to side with the EU on this question (as it has with Antigua), it would appear that the US will have to pay a price for its stance.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
It's a barginning chip
But the EU on the other hand, has long standing trade grudges with the US and this gives them a new poker chip to play with.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
EU calls ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
EU = Joke
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
If you don't like it stop doing it yourselves!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
EU Poker
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What a hypocrite
What a hypocritical viewpoint. Every person who is playing online poker, CHOSE to do that. Your arguing that if you don't want online poker, then other people shouldn't be allowed to play either?
And ONLINE is the key word, because the US lets people gambling in the USA, it's just when they want to online in Antigue its suddenly a moral issue??
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Another hypocrite
Bullshit, you have Vegas you have stock gambling, horse betting, state lotteries.
You just don't let your citizens play the games online they chose to play.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
i say let the gamblers play..and pay
I dont believe any intabgible should be covered by any type trade agreement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Its all about money...
I'd really like to see what the US government would do if Antigua setup an allofmp3.com like site. Simple. The recording industry would persuade (i.e. pay) the US to go after Antigua. Isn't it amazing how the US has been going after other nations because "free trade" agreements (basically a copyright conformity crusade) but repeatedly ignores the fact that the WTO sided with Atigua?
Not to sound negative but with actions like this I don't see the US lasting beyond a few more centuries. The government is up to the highest bidder, they try to tell other nations what to do, and spend millions in money and thousands (thats not just counting current events in the Middle East) in lives to secure democracy, all while its own citizens are starving on the streets ever day.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What a hypocrite
"1.) I don't have a problem with people gaining access to online gambling"
I'm not sure what part of that you don't understand.
"2.)(figuratively speaking) I'll be damned if I let someone tell me how I run my household."
"Figuratively speaking" being the key phrase here. Meaning, if a country chooses NOT to have something then what right does any other country have to attempt to force thier buisness practices on them.
In this instance, the EU doesn't give a rats ass if Americans or anybody else for that matter can gamble online or not, they just want to figure out how to line thier pockets.
Please try to read the story (and my posts) alittle more clearly. You may actually learn something :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Its all about money...
Especially with the last paragraph.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
don't assume those of us in the US are happy, eith
I'm no more pleased than people overseas are with the US's "selective gambling ban". The political system here has been corrupted by the ability to sneak things into unrelated bills and such.
The quicker someone gets rid of bush in ANY way I would applaud it...unfortunately his replacements are garbage too (democratic and republican, all are trash), and the corruption in our political system is so rampant its disgusting.
I think I'm going to put together my own group to fight for the rights of the people or something via political donations since it seems money is the only thing that talks nowadays. Lobbyists, fundies, house and senate all only listen to the money they're given anyway.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's the law stupid
[ link to this | view in thread ]
EU = mad because we allow certain areas of gambling, but not the kind that benifits them so they cry foul.
just as american companies claim foul on foreign companies that export to us, but have restrictive import limits on similar goods coming into their country. Its all bout who is making the money, and EU is madbecause the us is trying to keep its money here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Every country could set their rule about what shou
Do you find it that different than, say, the china gov. deciding to ban websites that contains information they don't want to be seen either ?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
We could tax gambling
The greatest fear of casinos in Antigua is that we will legalize online gambling and the Las Vages players will get involved and drive them out of business. They are trying to get US money without US compition is what they are trying to do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Its all about money...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
U.S. Regulation vs. Consumer Interest
Ask yourself this: How would you feel if you signed up for an Online Poker Game. 100's of people joined and everyone bought $250 worth of chips. The cards just fell into your hand and you end up winning $75,000 after 18 grueling hours. When you go to cash out, you get excuses about confirming your checking account, address, Photo ID and anything else you can imagine. The money never shows up, you even loose the $250 you put in! You call the "Authorities" to report fraudulent activities. They contact the government of the country hosting the business. The government in that country responds with some statement claiming that since the company is current on their taxes, they trust them to handle the matter without any invovlment from the local authorities.
This is one example of how online gambling became such an issue for the U.S. Government. Even when we can identify and prove who is responisble, many of the foriegn governments in these small countries, become reluctant to take any action for fear that the businesses paying them taxes will move shop to another country which will turn a blind eye. This business model was developed by organized crime, drug cartels, and recently adopted by terrorists.
The U.S. is not trying to limit it's citizens because of a control conspiracy. This is simply a safe and conservative approach to being responsible for protecting the American Consumer.
If you really want to play poker online and win $$. May I suggest a site like www.betzip.com ? You pay $20/Month and can participate in unlimited cash tournaments every week. Place near the top or win these tournaments, and you get paid. They were the first company to get individual states to approve the business for U.S. consumer participation. You are playing real tournaments! The monthly membership serves as the entry fee, and you can't loose your entire paycheck by participating.
Please don't flame this post. I enjoy reading your opinions, and just thought you might want to have some better information.
T.T.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I always find it interesting that though they live in our shadow of our US protection in manners economic as well as military they criticize us so harshly.
Always funny to watch someone reap in the benefits of a negative action but then distance themselves from the consequences of the system that brings them so much benefit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: EU calls ...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: U.S. Regulation vs. Consumer Interest
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Every country could set their rule about what
You could use that example for just about anything concerning any county and then try to make claim that the country in question is oppressing thier citizens.
Sorry but that analogy just ain't working.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: U.S. Regulation vs. Consumer Interest
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: U.S. Regulation vs. Consumer Interest
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: stupid
they're not telling you how to run your country. The EU and Antigua are telling you you should adhere to free trade agreements you agree to, and guess what... the WTO (you know, the same organization your country uses to force it's welfare system (more commonly known as copyright)) agrees with them.
You don't want that? fine, leave the WTO, annul all free trade agreements and see how much you can still export...
Don't bitch like a little girl because others are simply telling you you can't have your cake and eat it too...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: U.S. Regulation vs. Consumer Interest
sounds ludicrous, doesn't it? so does your scenario
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: stupid
Decades ago the US found it useful to put a war monger in power in the Middle East and everything was good...until he got out of hand and all of a sudden he became the enemy.
Recently the RIIA starting using the US gov. as a tool to enforce "free trade agreements" in which the main focal point was to make sure other nations abided by American IP laws.
And now that the WTO have passed a ruling that goes against the US agenda they decided to just ignore the ruling. How quaint.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Government of the Money, by the Money, for the Mon
Will this happen in my lifetime? Not likely, people are too comfortable with the evil they know versus the potential evil of the unknown. However if the current situation continues (manufacturers of electronic voting machines guaranteeing results to certain parties, ignoring the 'missing' 18,000 votes in a race decided by less than 400 votes, and similar perversions of the intention of the system.) it won't be too long before people start considering the idea of replacing the existing system with something that works (assuming that some corporation is not already in a position of complete control over the US Government).
Imagine how much money would be saved if all government employees were laid off and all government funded projects/programs were canceled. There would be serious repercussions, but nothing that the savings of billions of dollars wouldn't be able to cover ..... If all employees were given full retirement with their current salary for the rest of their life, there would still be billions of dollars left to clean up the other residual messes.
This won't be a bloodless change, just as the US/British change wasn't bloodless, but would anybody argue that it was a bad decision?
OH no, I'm seriously talking about going into politics (revolution is a form of politics), somebody shoot me now...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: U.S. Regulation vs. Consumer Interest
Then lets get into US agriculture subsidies, perhaps not we'll never resolve anything then, well if it was abolished it would be a start !!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This craziness
[ link to this | view in thread ]