Jump to content

Raymer Responds Again..... In Star Jones Fashion "i Am A Lawyer!"


Recommended Posts

I think "Name" poker players are getting a bit carried away these days. They are not gods. Why should they think that it is their right to file a lawsuit which could potentially prove very damaging to the future of poker. The flipside of the T.V coverage which has clearly been the catylst to the 'poker boom, is that it has created some Huge EGO's in poker, people who think they are doing the best for the players etc.. etc... Whats happened to the players who just play, win and spend the money on whatever they want, and not try and be a vigilante/martyr. At the end of the day we are only poker players we make our living one way other people make it another. Get It quietly for pitty's sake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Greg obviously speeks way to quickly. I guess he figures beause he wins the WSOP once that hes 'the man' at poker. I believe his comments to be way out of line. Why would he say somthing so stupid.. ???!??If you dont like what the WPT is doing.. its a simple concept... DONT PLAY.Honestly though, give Daniel a Break.. He gets so much attention.. his every move is scrutenized by everyone.. this is no longer about poker.. its worse then schoolgirls from highschool.Hes absolutly right.. when he says that without the WPT your current incomes would not be there. Online poker has exploded because of the WPT. Without the WPT this would not even be a discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
DN (respectfully),I don't think you should have gotten involved in this lawsuit by stating your opinions on a widely viewed and very much public video blog. I completely understand and support your right to use it any way you'd like and would defend that right above and beyond everything else.I just don't think it was 1.) very smart to do so given it only brings MORE ATTENTION to the subject, the very thing you are worried about and 2.) Without confronting and discussing the matter with the 7 individuals first (assumming you didn't). It sounds like you only talked to Berman and your own lawyer friends.Regardless, I see your points and I agree with them for the most part, although I certainly agree with the plaintiffs that while they have some guarantees now their image/likeness won't be used by the WPT, what about if the entity is sold one day? In sports (and I'm including poker as a sport now), all you have is your likeness. Your talents are only a fraction of the business. In poker, not only do we put up the buy-ins to all the events without receiving any added money, but we are supposed to just give away our likeness rights for free without any question? I don't think so.You say the WPT made these players, and I agree, again, we should be grateful. But didn't ABC Monday Night Football make NFL stars? Didn't ESPN make Michael Jordan a star by showing the highlights on sportscenter night after night? Yes and yes, but does Michael Jordan just give away his likeness rights for free to the networks that broadcast him? ABSOLUTELY NOT.It is a symbiotic relationship and if you let one entitity feed on the other constantly without fighting for what's yours, that entity only becomes stronger in the long run and pretty soon, poker is not only fully-funded by the players, but are left endorsing things without compensation with their legal rights to their own image and likeness partially or fully owned by another entity. It's a dangerous, scary road to allow others to control something of that power, and while I agree the timing of this lawsuit COULD NOT be worse, the principles are sound.It is lawsuits like these that often pave the way for player rights, a possible union, and for getting leverage for the future of poker. If you sign everythig away without a fight, players will never make progress.But with respect, I do see your points, especially about not wanting to draw more attention to online poker and give politicians a 'new cause' to fight online poker (something that I'm sure motivated you speak out since you have your own online poker site). I don't think you nor Mr. Raymer are stupid, but now you have both resulted to childish antics. Him calling you stupid or implying so is out of line and the whole breast feeding thing....well funny, but come on, let's be adults. I appreciate your insights on this matter.Good luck in poker, life.
Well said !
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Lastly, you guys just don't seem to see the bigger picture. Sure, you say this has nothing to do with PokerStars or online poker in any way, but man, it would be totally naive to think that that won't come up. That you will be put under major scrutiny concerning the legality of your relationship with PokerStars. It's going to happen, and the seven of you could potentially make us all suffer."Wow I never thought of it like that. These people could get in some trouble working for a gambling site and living in America. We'll see

Link to post
Share on other sites

" Frankly, as I've stated before, I really don't even care who is right or wrong in this case. It is my opinion, that everyone will lose because of this lawsuit. While you think you are doing the poker world a favor, I strongly believe that all of the negative attention is the last thing we need right now." Daniel I must disagree as a European Poker player and must allready thank de 7 numbnuts for pursueing a law suit against the WPT.As u have stated before this lawsuit can ( and will ) bring negative attention to the online gaming industry for American players. Its not unlikely like u said before that a politician will see this a a cause to justifiy the banning of online poker in the US. And i have been thinking about the consiquences of this banning of so many American poker players ( and addicts ) and realised its probably gonna increase the value of my bankroll and that of other non American players. Why u may ask. Well its simple if Americans cant deposit $$ online with there credit cards it doesnt mean they arent going to play online poker any more , they will find ways to get $$ online. And because of these extra efforts that have to be put in ( read transaction costs ) to get $$'s online , i thikn the Value of an Online $ will go up in America. So that means i will be able to trade online $$ for bank $$ with Americans for a better price and thus increase the value of my Bankroll ( or any amount of dollars i deposit and can send to an American ).So once again THANK U 7 ( and teh politicians in Washington ) ffor trying to ruin the online poker scene for the American players so that the Value of online $'s in America will go up :club: P.S. im not afraid the players base online will decrease for a long time , since sites like Partypoker etc are commensing a very aggressive international marketing operation , which mean more fish in the short run :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Gotta concur with daniel here. It's almost as if these 7 decided to be martyrs without asking any of the affected if that's what they wanted. Also, in all of Raymers attacks on Daniel he never actaully refutes the fact that the timing of this lawsuit could not be worse. From what I read he basically says, "Daniel is not a lawyer, therefore he is talking out of his arse and cannot bring up any valid points." Well, gotta agree with Daniel when he says that this view is very close minded.It doesn't take a lawyer to tell you that this thing could get really ugly really fast.
It could get ugly fast. But I, for one, feel the blame for that will lie with the WPT for not offering a more reasonable contract for the players........not with the 7 who have challenged the WPT's unfair practices. Daniel has said he has had issues with the WPT before, but the WPT decided to work with Daniel so he could have his way . Now the 7 are trying to stand up for themselves and the WPT isn't budging. I don't blame them at all for challenging the WPT in court. I applaud them.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel stated his opinion concerning the 7 vs WPT, thats it. He never called anyone out and never made any nasty remarks about Lederer, Raymer, Bloch or any of the 7. He just stated his opinion that the lawsuit was not a good choice and was very bad timing. Unfortunately Raymer has really put this lawsuit to the attention of everyone with his public slamming of Daniel as " an idiot & sock puppet". Raymer should have just said he disagreed with Daniel opinions and thats all, not publicly ridicule one the Pokers most popular players. Now the the fireworks are starting and this dumb lawsuit will just ignite the flames of the American government on really cracking down on online gaming...especially poker. These guys, especially Raymer, did not think how this lawsuit would impact online poker & the US Governments views on it.
I really have to disagree with you there. DN made very public, very derogatory comments about the "ungrateful 7" and "paranoid 7", how the lawsuit would be horrible for poker and bring bad publicity, and that the lawsuit had no validity. DN has every right to voice his opinion if he wants, especially here in his own forum. I'm just pointing out that it is rather silly to complain about the bad publicity this suit will bring to poker by complaining about it publically to bring even more attention to the matter. If Annie Duke has a hidden deal in her past, let it be out in the open. If anyone has "secret dealings", who cares if it comes out ? If you have done nothing illegal, you have nothing to hide. I don't understand the arguement of DN's that the lawsuit is bad because a lot of history/deals will be revealed. Get it all out in the open.....maybe then the ultra conservatives won't be so eager to shut us all down.That said, I am a HUGE DN fan. It would be awful if the US goes on a rampage and starts arresting all partial owners in online poker sites.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I really have to disagree with you there. DN made very public, very derogatory comments about the "ungrateful 7" and "paranoid 7", how the lawsuit would be horrible for poker and bring bad publicity, and that the lawsuit had no validity. DN has every right to voice his opinion if he wants, especially here in his own forum. I'm just pointing out that it is rather silly to complain about the bad publicity this suit will bring to poker by complaining about it publically to bring even more attention to the matter. If Annie Duke has a hidden deal in her past, let it be out in the open. If anyone has "secret dealings", who cares if it comes out ? If you have done nothing illegal, you have nothing to hide. I don't understand the arguement of DN's that the lawsuit is bad because a lot of history/deals will be revealed. Get it all out in the open.....maybe then the ultra conservatives won't be so eager to shut us all down.That said, I am a HUGE DN fan. It would be awful if the US goes on a rampage and starts arresting all partial owners in online poker sites.
Growing older, but not upold and short.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe what Daniel says is right. Online and other forms of poker doesnt have a chance if the lawsuit goes all the way. Its very sad because alot of people like myself really enjoy playing online as a hobby or profession. And if it affects online it will certainly affect the large buyins everywhere that airs on television every week. There will be alot less people playing, lesser prize pools and lesser ratings, which means less tv exposure in the long run. Great goin Magnificent Seven.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me - and I'm no expert or lawyer, I wouldn't want Mr. Raymer to confuse me with them - that the lawsuit's complaints, particularly those that are concerned with specific "wrongs", relate solely to the plantiffs' existing income sources. Meaning that they aren't upset about WPTE's *ability* to use their likeness, rather they are upset about their video games having legal competition and potentially resulting in less income.The lawsuit looks more to me (a non-lawyer/expert) as an attempt to snuff out competition. Now, and remember I am not a lawyer or expert, isn't antitrust law in existence to prevent the elimitation of competition by means other than through legitimate competition in the marketplace? Doesn't that smell a lot like one of the things the seven are accusing WPTE of?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest problems I see with this lawsuit has nothing to do with the actual suit itself - but rather, has everything to do with the people filing it and the way they are carrying themselves in doing so. You don't imply that you are speaking on behalf of an entire group of people when you aren't. I think this is DN's biggest gripe, and while I don't know all the details and probably never will, it seems from both sides that this group of 7 has stepped on some toes in taking this issue to court. Just because you think you're trying to help somebody doesn't mean they want your help, or even need it. And frankly - DN is right on the money about how the WPT has advanced the game of poker on a world wide level, and made these ordinary men into celebrities either directly or indirectly. Biting the hand that has fed you now for years seems like poor form - I can't say that I agree with the policies of the WPT, but at the same time, nobody is forcing you to play these specific events when there are literally thousands of others taking place all over the world at any given time. On top of this - you are now casting more shadows over the game in a time when we should all be celebrating it.. Look at the amazing number of participants in the WSOP this year - the game is still surging in popularity, despite the efforts of the US Government to shut down everything outside of sanctioned casino's, and you want to throw even more fuel on the fire now?To me - it seems petty. Win the case - and what do you get? A little. Lose the case... and it seems like you might lose a lot, from everywhere now on. I just really wonder if this is fighting the good fight, or trying to kick up dirt over a few personal problems with the WPT... because i really have a hard time, as an outsider mind you (****, i forgot to preface my statements! now raymer won't take me seriously!!!!), figuring out how this is the former in anyway, shape, or form.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know I cant help but think of this when i read all the stuff on the lawsuit. My only hope is the judge that hears their case is a **** from FCP. My god if I knew that happened I dont think Greg would be able to show his face in public EVER.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote DN for Leader of the Anti-Player Movement.DN you should stir the waters even more. Form a group of players and stand against the ungreatful 7. Not in a lawsuit but more or less power in numbers. Shun them with a massive following.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Greg (FossilMan) 2004 WSOP Champion Reged: 09/04/02 Posts: 2516 Loc: Raleigh, NC Re: Fossilman's Account Hacked? [Re: LongBall42] #6825656 - 08/07/06 12:51 PM Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply I'd like to mention two things. This is in reply to several different posts throughout the thread.First, I was wrong to insult Daniel. Whatever my feelings, I should have kept the negative comments to myself. They don't help me or the cause we are fighting in this lawsuit, and they might have been hurtful to Daniel. For that I am sorry, and I do apologize.Second, many people make the comment that if players don't like the WPT release, they can simply choose not to play. That is true. However, what if you wish to play in an open-to-the-public big-buyin televised tournament? Other than the WPT, where can you do this? The WSOP, of course; as well as the U.S. Poker Championships at the Taj. So, for a month and a half in Vegas you can play the WSOP, and then with the Circuit events and the Taj that's another half dozen events per year. What else?I know of no other options within the U.S. Events like the NBC Heads-up Championship and Poker SuperStars Invitational don't count, because they are not open to the public.So, if you have other events you think meet the above definition, let us know. I'm pretty sure there are none at the present.Thanks, Greg Raymer (FossilMan) He did sort of apologize later in the thread...still words were already out there.redwings96

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...