WTO Rules on Internet Gambling Case 171
doggod writes "The Associated Press reports today that the WTO has finally ruled on Antigua's complaint against the US over online gambling. The complaints stems from what Antigua sees as unfair trade practices relating to the US passage last year of a law that forbids banks from handling money to and from online casinos. The amount they awarded is significantly less than Antigua asked for. If you download a copyrighted song from a server in Antigua, will that be an ironclad defense that will make you invulnerable to future attacks from the RIAA?"
nahhh (Score:4, Interesting)
you're surely cracked (Score:3, Interesting)
This has got to be a joke. The concept of "unclean hands" is not applicable on an international policy-and-treaty basis. One cannot ignore the rule of one treaty because another country ignores the rule of another treaty. Even though the US Constitution ranks the treaty as being the supreme law of the land (theoretically above anything the executive, legislative or judiciary can do), this does not apply to whether or not you can legitimately grab a copy of Britney's latest dance video without concern for authority.
Re:nahhh (Score:5, Interesting)
The US doesn't need the WTO to impose sanctions, no. But if it does so then it's blatant protectionism of American gambling and copyright industries against Antiguan competition. The EU and Japan have both been making pro-Antiguan noises in this dispute, and if the US decides to try some form of economic bullying on Antigua, then it's possible that Europe and Japan might step in. The US is rich and powerful, but not so rich that it will risk a devastating trade war with Europe when the dollar's already on the slide, over a few gambling sites and pirate havens in the Caribbean.
Re:you're surely cracked (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Exactly what does this have to do with RIAA (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:And why would anyone think... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:And why would anyone think... (Score:3, Interesting)
The difference being that the US's opponent in the steel case was the EU, whereas in the lumber case it was Canada; European retaliatory sanctions would have hurt. Which doesn't bode too well for Antigua, unless some big players decide to come in on their side. Europe actually might do just that; there are quite a few British gambling sites that would rather like access to the American market.
Then again, it remains to be seen how much Antigua's new status as a copyright free zone will hurt the US. A lot of media folk will scream. They own a lot of senators.
Re:nahhh (Score:5, Interesting)
This isn't "protectionism". This is moral meddling. The US wants the ability to
control who gambles on what where. They don't have that ability with a foreign
company. This isn't "protectionism". It's simply a reflection of the fact that
in this area the US is "attempting to legislate morality".
It does this in a very byzantine fashion.
The same goes for other forms of "vice" like alchohol or sex.
Try talking to a small US vineyard trying to sell to customers in other States.
The extreme reaction here is just an excuse for mindless US bashing. Some people
have found their gift wrapped excuse and by golly they're going to use it.
Re:you're surely cracked (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:nahhh (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:cue "politics as usual" (Score:3, Interesting)
I prefer Las Vegas casinos, though, because hookers are legal.
And speaking of gambling, I'd not gambled in a casino since a couple of buddies talked me into going to Nevada when I was stationed in California in the USAF in 1975. So last summer I went to the riverboat, and the new electronic slot machines SUCK! Boring as hell. You young folks don't know what you missed back when they had mechanical one armed bandits.
First time I've seen a computerized anything and wished for the mechanical version.
Re:Virtual Goods vs. Physical Goods (Score:5, Interesting)
The NYTimes just had an article about how Absinthe was thought to be one of those "kind of questionable things" but the law that made it illegal was overturned as part of a more massive anti-prohibition law. So many people thought it was technically illegal, but in reality it was fine.