Featured No Deposit Casino Bonuses

No Deposit Casino
No Deposit Bonus
Bonus Code
First Deposit Bonus
USA Players Accepted
$31
NDN31
200% up to $7777
Yes
$10
UPTOWN10
250% up to $8,888
Yes
$127
NDN127
400% up to $4,000
Yes
$1,500
No Code Needed
100% up to $200
No
$175
NDN175
100% up to $11,000
Yes
$100
100NEW
250% up to $7000
Yes

 

Results 1 to 3 of 3

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    BETHLEHEM,P.A.
    Posts
    1,735

    Post Online Poker Sites Confirmed on Minnesota Censorship List

    SOURCE POKER NEWS.COM
    A complete list of the 199 Internet domains ordered to be blocked by Internet service providers doing business in the state of Minnesota has now been made public, and includes many online poker sites. The 199 domain entries (the list of which also included numeric Internet addresses and contact phone numbers) fall under a loosely defined interpretation of online gambling, and were purportedly drawn at random from a much larger sample of sites assembled by officials of the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division (AGED) of Minnesota’s Department of Public Safety.

    The list was first published on Thursday by the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association (iMEGA), which represents several online sites and has been active in a similar battle against Internet censorship in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, where an attempt to seize 141 domains was overturned but remains on appeal by Kentucky officials. In the Minnesota matter, iMEGA noted that not only were many of the censored sites not doing business in the US, but one of them, BetUS.com, once had an endorsement deal with former Minnesota Governor (and ex-professional wrestler) Jesse “The Body” Ventura.

    According to iMEGA chairman Joe Brennan Jr., “We question how much thought was put into the selection of these sites. To propose censoring Minnesota residents’ Web access and not to know which sites are even in the US market makes me wonder just how seriously the DPS is taking this action. It comes off as a half-baked attempt at intimidation rather than thoughtful enforcement.” An official at AGED did not return a call seeking comment for this story.

    Eleven different ISPs covering all forms of Internet connectivity were included in the Minnesota order. As with the Kentucky list, online poker sites made up only a small percentage of the sites, though many prominent sites were included. Among those poker sites listed within the Minnesota order (whether or not they accept US customers) were the following:

    Bodog
    CD Poker
    Everest Poker
    Full Tilt Poker
    Mansion Poker
    Noble Poker
    Pokerroom.com (now defunct)
    Titan Poker
    William Hill

    Several less prominent poker sites were present as well, though sites such as Absolute Poker, UltimateBet, PokerStars and PartyPoker were not. PartyPoker’s sister site PartyCasino was on the list, however.

    The order itself is already coming under attack from several legal quarters. One early point of dispute is that ISPs have already been judged not to be “common carriers”, a condition necessary in the statutory language provided within the order.


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    fort saskatchewan alberta
    Posts
    1,016

    Default regarding minisota players!!!

    hey guys its me im feeling a lot better had some beers last night and lost a bunch of money playing glo bug lolol but did well i thought

    ....
    well i found this artical and thought it would be or is usefull to this forum
    and the people from minni who play here

    By Haley Hintze

    Officials of the Minnesota Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division (AGED) on Monday issued an order to eleven Internet service providers serving the state, demanding that these ISPs block access by Minnesotans to approximately 200 sites connected to online gambling. The official notice to the ISPs was accompanied by a press release announcing the order, which included a warning sounded against both internet gambling sites and Minnesota residents desiring to visit the sites. The list of sites has not yet been made public.

    The order served upon the ISPs cited the United States' federal Interstate Wire Act of 1961 as the basis for the action, a law created to ban the transmission of sports bets over telephones. AGED's interpretation of the Wire Act in issuing the order was touted as the "first attempt by a state to employ this federal statute to restrict access to online gambling sites." Later US laws such as the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 and the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act were built upon the Wire Act, though these laws' reach beyond sportsbetting has never been affirmed in court.

    These are the eleven ISPs ordered to block access to Minnesota residents:

    AT&T Internet Services, San Antonio, TX
    Charter Communications, St. Louis, MO
    Comcast Cable, Moorestown, NJ
    Direct TV, Los Angeles, CA
    Dish Network, Englewood, CO
    Embarq, Overland Park, KS
    Sprint/Nextel, Overland Park, KS
    Frontier Communications, Stamford, CT
    Qwest, Denver, CO
    Verizon Wireless, Bedminster, NJ
    Wildblue Communications, Greenwood Village, CO

    A spokesperson for Comcast stated that the order was under legal review, but the company offered no official comment. Each of the eleven companies faces an implied threat by Minnesota officials to block access within two to three weeks, as "issues of non-compliance will be referred to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)." The AGED order also included phone numbers for many of the to-be-censored sites, demanding that access to these phone numbers also be turned off throughout the state. "For more than two decades," noted the AGED press release, "telecoms have shut down telephone numbers at the request of law enforcement agencies when believed to be involved in illegal activities, such as sports book-making telephone numbers."

    The Minnesota press release also included the blanket (and false) declaration that "Online gambling is illegal in all U.S. states," despite several US states offering, online, both lottery and pari-mutuel betting services. The 2006 UIGEA has already caused unintended bank-processing problems regarding sales of lottery tickets and the coding of such transactions.

    Response to the Minnesota order was swift and harsh, despite the uncertain presence of any poker sites on the as-yet-unpublished list. The Poker Players Alliance issued a release on Wednesday afternoon condemning the Minnesota action. The PPA statement, issued through Minnesota State PPA Director Matt Werden, read as follows:

    Matt Werden, the Minnesota state director of the Poker Players Alliance, the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with more than one million members nationwide, and more than 21,000 in Minnesota, today issued the following statement following the press announcement by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety that they are attempting to block citizens from accessing any commercial gambling sites, including online poker sites.

    "This isn't simply a heavy-handed tactic by the government; this is a clear misrepresentation of federal law, as well as Minnesota law, used in an unprecedented way to try and censor the Internet. I don't know what U.S. Code they're reading, but it is not illegal to play this great American pastime online, and we're calling their bluff.

    "The fact is, online poker is not illegal, it's not criminal, and it cannot be forcibly blocked by a state authority looking to score some political points. What are they going to do when this fails, ban poker books and burn our players at the stake?

    "We see headlines like this coming from communist China but never expect that it could happen here in Minnesota. The good news is groups like the Poker Players Alliance are here to protect the rights of poker players and set the record straight when government reaches too far. But this is more than just protecting poker - this is about keeping the internet free of censorship and ensuring that law abiding citizens can enjoy a game of Texas Hold 'Em in the comfort of their own home, whether it's online or with a group of friends.

    "The PPA will take any action necessary to make sure our members and the general public are aware of these oppressive and illegal actions, and to make sure the game of poker - in all its forms - is protected in the state of Minnesota."

    While reminiscent of the effort by the Commonwealth of Kentucky to seize Internet domains accessible to Kentucky residents (which was overruled in court but remains under appeal), the Minnesota effort takes a different approach and is likely to see its own day in the judicial system.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    fort saskatchewan alberta
    Posts
    1,016

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vickid View Post
    hey guys its me im feeling a lot better had some beers last night and lost a bunch of money playing glo bug lolol but did well i thought

    ....
    well i found this artical and thought it would be or is usefull to this forum
    and the people from minni who play here

    By Haley Hintze

    Officials of the Minnesota Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division (AGED) on Monday issued an order to eleven Internet service providers serving the state, demanding that these ISPs block access by Minnesotans to approximately 200 sites connected to online gambling. The official notice to the ISPs was accompanied by a press release announcing the order, which included a warning sounded against both internet gambling sites and Minnesota residents desiring to visit the sites. The list of sites has not yet been made public.

    The order served upon the ISPs cited the United States' federal Interstate Wire Act of 1961 as the basis for the action, a law created to ban the transmission of sports bets over telephones. AGED's interpretation of the Wire Act in issuing the order was touted as the "first attempt by a state to employ this federal statute to restrict access to online gambling sites." Later US laws such as the Interstate Horseracing Act of 1978 and the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act were built upon the Wire Act, though these laws' reach beyond sportsbetting has never been affirmed in court.

    These are the eleven ISPs ordered to block access to Minnesota residents:

    AT&T Internet Services, San Antonio, TX
    Charter Communications, St. Louis, MO
    Comcast Cable, Moorestown, NJ
    Direct TV, Los Angeles, CA
    Dish Network, Englewood, CO
    Embarq, Overland Park, KS
    Sprint/Nextel, Overland Park, KS
    Frontier Communications, Stamford, CT
    Qwest, Denver, CO
    Verizon Wireless, Bedminster, NJ
    Wildblue Communications, Greenwood Village, CO

    A spokesperson for Comcast stated that the order was under legal review, but the company offered no official comment. Each of the eleven companies faces an implied threat by Minnesota officials to block access within two to three weeks, as "issues of non-compliance will be referred to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)." The AGED order also included phone numbers for many of the to-be-censored sites, demanding that access to these phone numbers also be turned off throughout the state. "For more than two decades," noted the AGED press release, "telecoms have shut down telephone numbers at the request of law enforcement agencies when believed to be involved in illegal activities, such as sports book-making telephone numbers."

    The Minnesota press release also included the blanket (and false) declaration that "Online gambling is illegal in all U.S. states," despite several US states offering, online, both lottery and pari-mutuel betting services. The 2006 UIGEA has already caused unintended bank-processing problems regarding sales of lottery tickets and the coding of such transactions.

    Response to the Minnesota order was swift and harsh, despite the uncertain presence of any poker sites on the as-yet-unpublished list. The Poker Players Alliance issued a release on Wednesday afternoon condemning the Minnesota action. The PPA statement, issued through Minnesota State PPA Director Matt Werden, read as follows:

    Matt Werden, the Minnesota state director of the Poker Players Alliance, the leading poker grassroots advocacy group with more than one million members nationwide, and more than 21,000 in Minnesota, today issued the following statement following the press announcement by the Minnesota Department of Public Safety that they are attempting to block citizens from accessing any commercial gambling sites, including online poker sites.

    "This isn't simply a heavy-handed tactic by the government; this is a clear misrepresentation of federal law, as well as Minnesota law, used in an unprecedented way to try and censor the Internet. I don't know what U.S. Code they're reading, but it is not illegal to play this great American pastime online, and we're calling their bluff.

    "The fact is, online poker is not illegal, it's not criminal, and it cannot be forcibly blocked by a state authority looking to score some political points. What are they going to do when this fails, ban poker books and burn our players at the stake?

    "We see headlines like this coming from communist China but never expect that it could happen here in Minnesota. The good news is groups like the Poker Players Alliance are here to protect the rights of poker players and set the record straight when government reaches too far. But this is more than just protecting poker - this is about keeping the internet free of censorship and ensuring that law abiding citizens can enjoy a game of Texas Hold 'Em in the comfort of their own home, whether it's online or with a group of friends.

    "The PPA will take any action necessary to make sure our members and the general public are aware of these oppressive and illegal actions, and to make sure the game of poker - in all its forms - is protected in the state of Minnesota."

    While reminiscent of the effort by the Commonwealth of Kentucky to seize Internet domains accessible to Kentucky residents (which was overruled in court but remains under appeal), the Minnesota effort takes a different approach and is likely to see its own day in the judicial system.
    thanx for movign this ndn as i didnt see this thread alredy started my bad

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-08-2009, 02:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •