PPA Fighting Back Against Kentucky Governor.

Today, the Poker Players Alliance made a push to stop a pending court order that could possibly allow well over 100 gambling domains to be handed over to the Kentucky government.

The PPA filed what is otherwise known as an “Amicus Brief” to the state courts, which went over in detail how the plan to seize such domains would not be tolerated and could not possibly be enforceable by any local judge.  The issue has been so sensitive and the tensions so high that several high-profile casinos have already relinquished their names before a decision has even come down!

As many of you have already heard, lawyers representing the state filed a suit earlier this week against some of the top internet gaming establishments in the world, essentially coming out and saying the Kentucky government will not stand for its citizens playing online poker or placing any type of bets in an online casino. However, as most online poker advocates will tell you, such a suit is considered absurd given the fact that all of these domains are housed, operated, and ran in different countries and jurisdictions.  The fact that a single state is trying to take the names for themselves as a way to keep gambling “in-house” is an argument that might prove very tough to win.

The outlines of the PPA-filed Amicus Brief is detailed below (from PokerNews.com):

• Extensive research citing expert opinion that poker is indeed a game of skill;

• References to academic, gaming and artificial intelligence experts citing the fact that skill is an essential element to winning at poker, be it against a human or a computer;

• Unequivocal consensus among experts that in the long run a skilled poker player will beat an unskilled poker player;

• Kentucky state law asserts that “a contest or game in which eligibility to participate is determined by chance and the ultimate winner is determined by skill shall not be considered gambling”;

• Under Kentucky law, poker is a lawful game of skill because the facts can easily sustain a finding that skill of the player predominates over chance in determining outcome;

• The current case provides no evidence to suggest that any of the poker games played on any of the 141 websites in question are based on chance as opposed to skill;

• Cases in other states as well as a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) letter verify that skill is the dominant factor in the game of poker; and

• The case raises First Amendment free speech issues in restricting residents’ access to poker websites that contain poker news, blogs and forums as well as the ability to play poker.