The debate over whether online poker constitutes gambling or a game of skill has been deemed irrelevant in the US government's prosecution of Full Tilt Poker and PokerStars.
Judge Lewis Kaplan last week ruled the debate irrelevant as a defense strategy in trials resulting from Black Friday's online poker shutdowns, Canadian-poker reported.
Canadian-poker spokesperson Leon Daniels said he doesn't believe the judge was dismissing the relevance of the debate to the online poker community, but that he dismissed its relevance to the charges in question.
"The judge stated that he was 'surprised' that lawyers had attempted to use this debate as a defense for people involved in Black Friday," Daniels said.
"The problem wasn't the game, it was how American players' deposits were processed," he added. "When the UIGEA passed in 2006, most payment processors closed their doors to US-facing online poker sites. Sites that continued accepting Americans had to find ways to process payments without classifying them as online gaming transactions. The charges are about the ways PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker and Ultimate Bet processed players' transactions, which understandably raises questions about how these organisations work behind the scenes."
