On Thursday, lawyers from the Interactive Media Entertainment and Gaming Association (iMEGA) will lead a contingent into Frankfort, Kentucky in a case involving the seizure and potential forfeiture of 141 internet gambling domain names. Among those prepping is Ian Ramsey from Stites and Harbison, local counsel for the Interactive Gaming Council (IGC).

Oral arguments in the case will begin at 11:00am local time. The case is the final one on the docket for the week, leaving many in the industry speculating that the proceedings could last for longer than the scheduled 15 minutes per side. Ramsey told Poker News Daily what he’s expecting to unfold: “I expect that we’re going to have a lot of questions from the bench. The parties have raised many issues and the Supreme Court is going to have to sort through them.”

Among those factors that will contribute to the Supreme Court’s decision is whether the Commonwealth of Kentucky had jurisdiction to seize the domain names on the grounds that they were “gambling devices” and whether the State bringing a criminal gambling charge to a civil forfeiture hearing will hold weight. On the question of jurisdiction, Ramsey cited a ruling by the Arizona Supreme Court on October 16th, which the IGC submitted as supplemental authority in its Kentucky case. The Arizona legal battle ended with the state’s highest judicial body ruling, “However noble the State’s purpose is, in rem jurisdiction requires presence of the subject property in the state.”

The question remains as to where a domain name is located. Is it located on a bettor’s computer? Is it located on a server? Is it located overseas where the internet gambling site is based? Is it located somewhere in cyberspace? The Commonwealth of Kentucky, under the direction of Governor Steve Beshear and Justice and Public Safety Cabinet Secretary J. Michael Brown, charged that domain names were “gambling devices,” a term typically reserved for objects like roulette wheels and slot machines that you’d find in an underground casino.

Ramsey explained the far-reaching impact of the case, which has garnered worldwide attention: “The citizens of the Commonwealth of Kentucky are interested, the citizens of the United States are interested, and anyone around the world on the internet is interested in this case. We look forward to a well-reasoned, thoughtful opinion by our Supreme Court.” In January, the Kentucky Court of Appeals in Louisville ruled by a two to one margin that the State did not have jurisdiction to act. The lone dissenting opinion noted that the domain names were part of a larger gambling device.

The URLs in jeopardy belong to some of the behemoths of the industry like PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Ultimate Bet. Full Tilt Poker sought a backup plan by purchasing FullTilt.com last September, shortly after word broke that FullTiltPoker.com was among those domain names seized. Poker News Daily also learned that Ultimate Bet and Absolute Poker, both members of the USA-friendly CEREUS Network, had contingency plans in the event that their primary domain names were held hostage. If successful, the 141 domain names under fire would be unavailable not only in Kentucky, but also around the world.

Besides iMEGA and IGC, other organizations involved in the legal squabble include the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Electronic Frontier Foundation, eBay, Network Solutions, the Poker Players Alliance (PPA), and the Center for Democracy and Technology. In its amicus brief, the PPA argued that its one million members will suffer “immediate and irreparable harm” if the domain names are inaccessible and that poker is a game of skill and therefore not illegal gambling.

One Comment

  1. Smart guy says:

    If the #1 player in the world can make the final table in the largest poker tourny in the world out of over 6000 entries then that proves it, IT’S A GAME OF SKILL!!!!!!!

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *