The plaintiffs were contesting an earlier Franklin County Circuit Court ruling by Judge Thomas Wingate which supported the astounding presumption by state governor Steve Beshear that he has the authority and jurisdiction to seize and ultimately confiscate the Internet domain names of online gambling and other companies domiciled elsewhere in the world. The case, involving some 141 domains, has major implications for Internet commerce everywhere, and has attracted widespread media coverage and criticism from Net Neutrality organisations (see previous InfoPowa reports).
Judge Wingate's rulings are on hold pending the Appeal Court findings, which will hopefully show that he has overeached his jurisdiction and authority in the matter.
Not all perspectives on the case were heard Friday, although earlier briefs were considered. Attorneys for the various organisations who had filed amicus briefs - EFF, the Center for Democracy and Technology, the Poker Players Alliance and the ACLU-Kentucky - were denied a speaking slot before the judges.
Friday's hearing had been preceded by the opposing lawyers submitting briefs and arguments to Judges Michelle Keller, Michael Caperton and Jeff Taylor who heard the case. Other written submissions from friends of the court were also considered, and it was clear from the outset that the three Appeal Court judges were very well versed in the facts of the issue.
The hearing, which took just over 50 minutes, provided a platform for final oral arguments from legal representatives of companies impacted by the Wingate ruling, as well as iMEGA and IGC.
The judges asked many relevant and probing questions before retiring to consider their finding, which will be released at a date yet to be determined.
The Associated Press news agency, which covered the hearing, reported that William Johnson, a lawyer who represents five of the web sites, said Kentucky's laws do not spell out that the state can seize domain names. Because lawmakers haven't acted since the law was written in 1974, the state lacks the authority to seize the web sites and shut them down, Johnson said.
"If they had wanted to correct this law, they could have done so annually," Johnson said. "That is a matter for the legislature to decide."
Attorney Jon L. Fleischaker, representing the trade body iMEGA, said that the lower court had not properly applied Kentucky criminal statutes permitting forfeiture and confiscation, because there had been no previous criminal finding to support such action. Fleischaker argued that in order for Kentucky to use the seize and confiscate statute, there first had to be a criminal complaint followed by a conviction or a guilty plea. In other words, only after there is a finding of a violation of the criminal code could the seizure statute be used.
"What they have done is turn the law on its head," Fleischaker claimed. "If they want to bring a criminal case, they should bring a criminal case."
"It is not sufficient for the state or a lower court judge to decide on their own that there is a criminal violation - they have to go through a criminal proceeding first," he added.
The iMEGA representative said that the lower court hearing had also misapplied the definition of "gambling appliances" to extend to Internet domains. The state criminal statute definition of "gambling devices" which could be seized and confiscated could not be applied to an Internet domain, he argued.
The judges examined this argument with the state's lawyers, who continued to assert that because the domain gave access to the gambling website it could be construed as a gambling device.
Eric Lycan, an attorney who represented the Kentucky Justice Cabinet, which is handling the case for the state, rather than the state's Attorney General, described the online gambling sites in strong terms as a "massive, global, offshore criminal enterprise" whose owners know they are violating the laws of nearly every state in the country by fostering gambling via the Internet. He made the arguable allegation that over 80 percent of the websites' revenue comes from the United States, and that this gave individual states like Kentucky the right to exercise jurisdiction.
"They [the online gambling sites] are doing this because they don't think anyone can catch them," Lycan said.
Judge Michelle Keller asked Lycan the pertinent question of why the state doesn't handle the illegal gambling the same way it handles illegal drug transactions - by making both the sale, purchase and use of the drugs against the law. "It's illegal to sell the drugs and it is also illegal to use the drug," Keller said. "I don't see much of a difference here."
Lycan responded by claiming that the decision to only criminalise the offering of gambling was a decision made by lawmakers. "The legislature specifically exempted the player from the legislation," Lycan said.
The jurisdictional aspects of the case arose on several occasions and were debated.
William Johnson, representing some of the affected Web sites, argued that the sites were located offshore and that Kentucky cannot exert authority over property that is not within its boundaries.
For the state, Lycan responded that this was irrelevant as the offending websites were accessible within the state.
All News Categories
- General Gambling News (6875)
- Gambling Law & Society News (3451)
- Casino Games (3082)
- Casino Software (2924)
- Land Based Casino News (461)
- Promotions & Bonuses (304)
- Casino Banking (200)
- Casino Tournaments (111)
- General Poker News (53)
- General Sportsbook News (41)
- General Bingo News (38)
- LCB News (37)
- LCB Approved Casinos (21)
- Casino Warnings (18)
- Bingo Software (11)
- Bingo Games (9)
- Predatory Terms (6)
- Online Poker Tournaments (5)
Most Viewed ArticlesSee all
Live activity feed
" Jason FTA wrote: Hi claralie, Sorry but I have no idea what's going on with regards to your post. Please send me your username so that I can look into your account. The one thing I do no is that the €40 bonus was meant for active depositing players and the GFF50 bonus for inactive depositing players. It might be that the 40 bonus was sent to you in error, thus the agent offered you the correct 50 free offer. However I require your casino username so that I may investigate further. RegardsJason thank you Jason my username is clarie- for the $40 i have deposited somes days agos but i have also used freebies it is for this reason that i was denied but no email for verifcation account and for the payment declined- I know your rules about free bonus- i am sorry its me that i did not understood why $40 not eligible then $50 elgible- If i did not have winning for the first bonus there willl be not all that. Sorry i checked y account i deposited $30 the 09/19 and the promo was : ……….., redeem your 40 THANK YOU credits! THANK YOU for playing with us this week! We love entertaining you and your presence makes us feel special! To show our appreciation, here’s an exclusive… 40 FREE here the error ? "READ
" Oh, you hear the stories about how dangerous Ouija boards are, but hey—it’s just a game. Mary waited until midnight to begin our little game, and the four of us—Sarah, Jessie, me, and, Mary, started by asking all kinds of silly questions. It was a strange-looking board, covered with letters and symbols. There was a plastic pointer that was supposed to move across the board at the behest of the spirits. The instructions called it a planchette. Around one thirty in the morning, the planchette suddenly froze in Mary’s hand. It wouldn’t move, no matter how much we pushed and pulled. Mary turned her frightened blue eyes toward me. “I’m not doing it,” she said, lifting her hands. I grabbed the planchette myself and tried to push it around, but it was fixed to the board. Suddenly, a kind of electric shock buzzed through my fingers. I gasped and tried to pull my fingers from the planchette, but they were stuck. Mary and Jessie both tried to pull my fingers away, nothing helped. The other girls stared with wide, round eyes, as the planchette came alive under my fingers—which were still fixed to its surface—and began to move. “Help.” The words spelled out under my hand. “Help me. Help me.” The planchette kept moving back and forth between the h – e – l – p continuously, until Sarah cried out: “Who are you?” “Amber.” The board spelled. “My name is Amber. I am eight years old.” “What’s wrong?” Mary asked. Her face was so white all the freckles stood out like darkened age spots. “Water. Danger. Help. Scared.” The words spelled out as fast as my hand could move. “Call 9-1-1,” Mary cried suddenly. “Quick. Amber is in danger.” By this time, Sarah was gasping into the phone. Then she hung up the phone. “They wouldn’t listen to me,” she told us, almost in tears. At that instant, my hand was suddenly free from the planchette. “She’s gone,” I gasped, “See if you can contact her again,” Mary said urgently. “We need to know if she’s okay!” I picked up the plastic planchette again. “Amber, are you there?” I asked softly, afraid of what might happen. After a long pause, it moved slowly across the board and spelled out the words: “Too late.” And after another long pause. “Water. Flood. Drowned. Mobile. Alabama.” The planchette stopped.I knew that Amber was gone. None of us got much sleep that night. In the morning, we rushed through breakfast and then looked up the Alabama news on the Internet. None of us were surprised to read that there had been flash floods the night before. I read the names of those who had died in the flood. One of the victims was an eight-year-old girl named Amber. _____________________ My favorite casino is winaday..my username is : aymenpronet."READ
lcb activities in the last 24 hours
- new members
- members online
- guests online
- new posts
- free games played