Cast Your Vote On The Wpt Lawsuit

[Vegas King 0]

Daniel, i'm not trying to disrespect in anyway by saying this is biased.and maybe i completely missed something, but how exactly is this 'bad' for poker?

Any bad press, bickering, and mudslinging is going to hurt the online poker battle, which is the #1 battle that could kill this enormous growth. It is just not worth it for the sport or these individuals in the lawsuit even if the players win.

[Koy 0]

This lawsuit brings new meaning to tort reform. I wish the suits at FT, PP, PS and the likes would step up and condemn the lawsuit because it can only hurt them as well.

[cap gusto 0]

I am going to have to half agree and half disagree. I believe that bad press is going to happen for poker and that is very unfortunate. I understand self-preservation as much as the next person and understand the stance of bring down the game.On the flip side... I feel that the player's rights deserve as much protection as is being afforded to the game. I don't think that any of these 7 players should have to sacrifice their rights so as to maintain the games image as it is today.

[jayvegas420 0]

I think daniel's sole question was "Is it bad for poker?" I will only address this question. It certainly "isn't" good for the game or it's current progressive state but, I think we all know which 7 people this is "GOOD" for.

[skillzjl 0]

"And if you listened to Daniels blogs, and still think your comments are valid. Well im surprised that you even made it to law school. "You sir are an idiot. I respect Daniel's opinion on this case but there are legal arguments to be made on both sides.

cap gusto, read everything that i said. And perhaps try to give my comments some fair logical and rational thought. Of course theres legal matters that i dont know about you moron. Thats why i said my opinion could change, mr context editor, or are u just a moron, that seems to be so aparent.

[SteveyD 0]

This issue could be almost like the abortion issue or other issues like that. Each side has it's mind made up and no matter what either side says, no one's mind is about to change.

Yep this is just like abortion.....

[throwemaway 0]

Is there a thread or a website that details what exactly the lawsuit is about and the complaints made by the 7?Edit: Nvmd..wptlawsuit.com if anyone else was wondering the same thing

[grimtaash 0]

I voted "NO", but only by a small margin. I understand what it is the 7 are trying to achieve. I also feel the WPT has a right to determin the rules for participating in it's tournaments. Without debating any legal aspects(cuz I don't know em), I would side with the WPT. In regards to the question--Is this good or bad for poker?, I feel that in this instance it would be hard to find an overall positive aspect for the poker community as a whole. I don't feel it is necessarily an automatic bad thing for poker, but it's the sort of story that can come out negative. And never forget that our elected leaders love to "protect" our citizens from ourselves whenever possible.Oh, and don't buy for a second the argument that the 7 are standing up for all poker players. They are doing it for themselves.

[Triple Lucky 0]

I voted "NO", but only by a small margin. I understand what it is the 7 are trying to achieve. I also feel the WPT has a right to determin the rules for participating in it's tournaments. Without debating any legal aspects(cuz I don't know em), I would side with the WPT. In regards to the question--Is this good or bad for poker?, I feel that in this instance it would be hard to find an overall positive aspect for the poker community as a whole. I don't feel it is necessarily an automatic bad thing for poker, but it's the sort of story that can come out negative. And never forget that our elected leaders love to "protect" our citizens from ourselves whenever possible.Oh, and don't buy for a second the argument that the 7 are standing up for all poker players. They are doing it for themselves.

I vot e for Daniel!!!!!!!!

[nutzbuster 7]

42 (as of now) voting for the '7' ?Jopke!Wonder how many of those are newbie bomb throwers just trying to raise the ire of the other side? There is absolutley no way in helll anyone with half a brain could side with the 7 here. Their concerns should be (and could be) handled outside of the court rooms.This whole thing is so stupid... just insanely stupid.Perhaps we could get a fund together and buy the seven some diapers and pacifiers?

[Wandigo 1]

DN,Can you have an "Abstain" or "I don't know what's going on" option? I'd be lieing if I voted for any of the current two.Or if you want to run the entire thing down in 5 sentences, maybe I'll make a vote. (Internet is too slow to watch the v-blogs and I don't want to read 6 pages of discussion on it)

[sdnuol 0]

i think its a bad thing to focus so much time and energy on proving each other right/wrong. I vote for choice number 3 which is DN, go play golf, poker, etc., and let the 7 waste their time and money on something that may or may not be good or bad for poker.

[PairTheBoard 0]

The lawsuit is stupid. It's "Minority report" come to life. Let's sue them to stop something that hasn't happened but "might" happen.

According to the Complaint is HAS happened, at least twice.Link to the Lawsuit ComplaintFrom the Lawsuit Complaint==================57. For example, WPTE markets the "World Poker Tour" video game which competes with, among other things, the "World Championship Poker" line of video games co-Plaintiffs Howard Lederer, Annie Duke and Greg Raymer each have licensed to Crave Entertainment, Inc - which manufactures and sells the "World Championship Poker" video games - the exclusive right to use their names, likenesses, images in conjunction with Crave video games. WPTE, however, upon information and belief, has used video footage of Messrs. Lederer and Raymer and Ms Duke playing in the WPT tournament as part of its "World Poker Tour" video game. The co-Plaintiffs were never notified by WPTE of this fact, nor did they receive any compensation for WPTE's coercive use of their intellectual property rights.58. Another example is provided by WPTE's exploitation of the intellectual property rights of co-Plaintiff Phil Gordon, who is the founder and Chief Executive Officer of Expert Insight, a company which markets instructional poker DVD's and books among other things. In connection with Expert Insight, Mr. Gordon and co-Plaintiff Andrew Bloch run the "Las Vegas Academy" poker fantasy camp, where interested poker and blackjack players can pay for instruction from Messrs. Gordon and Bloch. WPTE runs its own poker fantasy camp - "World Poker Tour Boot Camp" - which is a head-to-head competitor with the Las Vegas Academy. Upon information and belief, WPTE has used video footage of Mr. Gordon playing in WPT tournaments - without his prior knowledge or any compensation - to promote its World Poker Tour Boot Camp.==============This is the Crux of the Complaint. The language of the Release gives the WPT Broad Rights to player names and images to promote WPT products beyond the TV show, AND it has used those rights against player wishes.Daniel has said that he is all for standing up for principle and he would stand up for this principle just as he objected when the WPT tried to use His Image in this way, BUT Daniel claims the WPT has never actually done this. He has said that if it came to light that the WPT Had done this kind of thing he would reconsider his position. Yet Items 57 and 58 of the Seven's Complaint are examples of exactly such things. I've posted these items several times now. Daniel has yet to respond.PairTheBoard

[poguemahone68 0]

DN himself is now starting ridiculous poll threadsThis might be the worst I've seen general

[cap gusto 0]

to be entirely fair to you skills... I did re-read your post. I still stand by my posting your comments were idiotic on the Raymer issue. I don't dispute your lack of legal knowledge or opinion change. You state that Raymer's views aren't valid because Daniel says so in a Vblog? come off it man! that is the dumbest **** I ever heard.

[crowTrobot 2]

obviously the majority of people here won't know enough of the details to have an informed opinion. duh.

[Balloon guy 158]

I would have voted for:Not that big of a deal either way.

[AngloBoy 0]

stupid is as stupid does

[dirtystacks 0]

This lawsuit brings new meaning to tort reform. I wish the suits at FT, PP, PS and the likes would step up and condemn the lawsuit because it can only hurt them as well.

This is a great example of the uninformed opinons on this site (with respect to legal issues). Tort reform has nothing to do with this suit. This is primarily an antitrust suit. Tort reform is about limiting punitive damages for causes of action in tort.

[Balloon guy 158]

This is a great example of the uninformed opinons on this site (with respect to legal issues). Tort reform has nothing to do with this suit. This is primarily an antitrust suit. Tort reform is about limiting punitive damages for causes of action in tort.

What's tart reform then?

[thib82 0]

I don't know much about the lawsuit against the WPT, to be honest. I think all it comes down too are these big name pro's thinking they have enough pull now that they can get what they want. They were probably hoping that the WPT would see a few high profile and big name players pissed off about something, and would accomadate them in any way they needed. The WPT, isn't backing down, and now the players ego's are pushing them to take it further. (Poker players with big ego's, go figure). Raymer is obviously mad at the fact that DN is being vocal about it, as far as I know, it's just in his blogs, and feels he needs to strike back. If he thinks calling another person a tool on a website is going to get his cause more support, he is dead wrong. I don't really care what happens either way, if I did, I would take the time to read about the lawsuit. And as far as whether it brings negative attention, yeah it probably will, being that most of these guys are affiliates of online sites. We all know that the last thing online poker needs is negative attention. When you go after the big boys(The WPT), they will fight dirty. Just hope that none of you have any skeletons hidden somewhere.

[JackArnal 0]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort

[loxo 0]

obviously the majority of people here won't know enough of the details to have an informed opinion. duh.

Yep totally agree. I didn't vote precisely because I fall into this category. Even if I had to vote I would be torn by the choices. IMHO both the options we have been given have some merit.When is it not commendable for a group of people to stand up for what they believe in and fight for what they think is right? So a tick probably goes in that box for me.But as far as, will this bring up a plethora of bad publicity for poker, I'd have to lean towards that as well, in the short term at least. Tick in that box as well.What's confusing me most about the entire subject is the guys filing the lawsuit would have to be aware that there is a distinct possibility that some mud would be thrown in any courtroom battle yet seem determined to fight on. I mean these guys all have commercial deals with online site's etc. so they have as much to lose as anyone. Makes me think they must truly believe in what they are fighting for? Either that or they have been led to believe they can win before the courtroom.......who knows.Anyway as I said earlier I'm not educated on the subject enough to have a real opinion either way, I would however like to see something else on the boards a bit

[XX44466XX 0]

(I just saw this thread and thought I'd add this here even though I originally posted it in DN's blog subforum...)There's been a whole lot of discussion here in the forum as regards this lawsuit against the WPT by this now infamous Seven. Lot of joke threads which are starting to get real old amongst the more serious posts. Now I'm a nobody but I have been enjoying poker's popularity just as much as the next so this is just my $0.02Over a few years ago when the WPT was being broadcast on cable on a regular basis is basically what brought me into the game. A group of buddies and I would congregate and watch the match on TV while enjoying a friendly card game. Nowadays I play way too much but have been overall profitable on the tables so it's not a bad thing. And in a sense, I too owe it to Lyle Berman's ingenuity, for propelling the explosion of the game into mainstream America. I certainly wouldn't have a library of poker books as I do now. And the money (that I wouldn't have made) would most certainly not be recirculated back in the poker industry (from all the poker-related purchases that I also would not have made).So for most players nowadays, especially moreso the pros included in the Seven, and including myself, Daniel's statement about "biting the hand that fed you" is completely valid IMO. I wouldn't be so into this poker craze probably nowadays, and who even knows if it would even be occurring, if not for the introduction of the "hole-cam" to intrigue the public (Hellmuth and Kaplan can get you only so far, you know?). And like DN also said, this will be tied into online gaming, which is exactly where no additional public foucs needs to be at this present time.So I do not support those who are fighting against the WPT and I most definitely am behind Daniel and his thoughts on the issue. I was behind Raymer when many thought he was a fluke after his WSOP win yet this has clearly cast him in a negative light in my book. Daniel, you may choose not to but I certainly will root against him for his disparaging comments. I personally thank you Daniel for sharing your perspective of this unfortunate situation and all you've done for the game. You're a stand-up guy and I hope nothing but the best for you.Except for in the FCPHUPL.I especially enjoyed this little gem:

I'd have no f'ing clue who Howard Lederer is if it weren't for the WPT.

Flame away peeps.

[digitalmonkey 929]

Oh how I long for the innocent days of Dreamclown.