KY Court Re-Tries Domain Seizure
- By theWHIR.com , October 17, 2008
-
Share
|
Send |
Print |
Comments (5)
Reddit
Newsvine
Stumbleupon
Twitter
Facebook
Verio Attracts Resellers with Free Month of VPS Hosting: Companies looking to boost revenues are finding Verio's Free VPS promotion the right fit for getting started as Hosting Reseller.
By David Hamilton, theWHIR.com
October 17, 2008 -- (WEB HOST INDUSTRY REVIEW) -- A judge has refused to dismiss charges in the latest chapter of a controversial Kentucky lawsuit supported by Governor Steve Beshear that aims to block access to 141 online casino domains.
According to an Associated Press report, Judge Thomas Wingate will hear arguments pro and con before November 17, when he will decide whether to give the state control of the gambling domain names.
If successful, Kentucky will set a precedent that could let the government tell registrars to effectively shutdown online gambling websites, which are illegal in the US. Most online gambling websites, however, are hosted overseas, where US courts normally have no jurisdiction. There are also fears that letting the state shut down gambling websites will give the state the right to shutdown other websites.
The Internet Commerce Association has already denounced the Kentucky courtroom in a public statement. "The Internet Commerce Association is extremely disappointed in the decision issued by the Court this afternoon," wrote ICA president Jeremiah Johnston. This is a dangerous decision not just for domain name investors and developers but for all who value commerce and free speech on the Internet."
The Poker Players Alliance is also officially opposed to shutting down gambling websites, suggesting instead tighter regulation, taxation methods and more consumer protection on Internet gambling. They do, however, support government involvement, endorsing the US House of Representatives Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank's HR 2460 legislation that would specifically achieve their regulatory goals.
While the lawsuit has garnered strong opposition from the online community, Gov. Beshear stands by Judge Wingate, saying online gambling "leeches on our communities," however, he maintains that state-condoned gambling at casinos and horse races should remain legal.
 |
OLDER: Modular Design Thrives Outside Box | | | NEWER: NTT America Adds Second VA Facility |  |
Comment anonymously or log into your WHIR account
Comment by Anonymous on Friday, October 17, 2008
"If successful, Kentucky will set a precedent that could let the government tell registrars to effectively shutdown online gambling websites, which are illegal in the US."
Sorry, but you're wrong. Gambling websites are NOT illegal in the United States.
With the exception of a handful of states (Washington, NY, etc.,) there are NO laws prohibiting placing bets online.
If you're referring to the UIGEA, that only covers payments to and from online casinos/poker rooms, NOT gambling itself.
Please check your facts.
Thanks.
Comment by Anonymous on Friday, October 17, 2008
I was running out of characters, so I'll continue here.
This case should be thrown out of court for the sole reason of being unconstitutional. What's next? Are states in the Bible belt going to seize control and subsequently block adult websites, because they don't want their residents viewing porn?
If Judge Wingate allows Kentucky to take control of these domain names, we're going to be no better than China is and how they already censor the Internet.
Comment by Anonymous on Friday, October 17, 2008
One last comment.
It's a public FACT that McCain loves to gamble, but the GOP is dead set against online gambling, and will do everything in their power to ban it. Why? Because they can't tax it. If they can't do that, then they don't want anyone doing it.
If they were doing it for moral reasons, then by the same principle they should shut down [offline] gambling such as they did to alcohol during prohibition.
Comment by Anonymous on Friday, October 17, 2008
Brian, thanks for commenting. What's illegal and what's not is definitely a matter that's under constant debate, particularly in the case of online gambling. Hower I think you're referring to placing bets online, whereas the story is referring to accepting bets online - which gambling sites tend to circumvent by operating offshore.
I think we're in agreemnt that allowing the state of Kentucky to take away the domains of websites it doesn't want Kentuckians looking at is a pretty scary answer to this situation.
Comment by Anonymous on Saturday, October 18, 2008
Judge Thomas Wingate doesn't have jurisdiction in this
matter.
As the internet is governed by an international body appointed by the
U.S. federal government, the state of Kentucky has no jurisdiction
regarding domain names or websites. It is why the federal courts have
repeatedly struck down attempts by state courts to ban other types of
web content such as pornography admonishing plaintiffs that only
federal courts can rule on said matters.
Wingate has exceeded his authority. Any order that Wingate issues will
be unenforceable and invalid. However, in the United States, sadly,
judges cannot be found guilty of contempt.
Logging in allows enhanced commenting features (such as external linking) in news, features, blogs and more.