Calvin Ayre Indicted: Does Bodog.com Prosecution Mean U.S. Law Extends To All .Com Domain Owners?

Calvin Ayre Illegal Gambling Charges

The Huffington Post Canada   First Posted: 03/ 1/2012 3:38 pm Updated: 03/ 1/2012 3:54 pm

The indictment of Canadian billionaire Calvin Ayre in the U.S. on illegal gambling charges this week is raising concerns among Internet experts that anyone who owns a .com domain could find themselves subject to U.S. law, even if their activities are entirely outside the United States.

Ayre is the founder and owner of Bodog, a sports gambling site that operates worldwide and, in the past, has been accused of "taunting and dodging" U.S. authorities.

Federal prosecutors in Maryland unsealed an indictment against Ayre and three other Canadians on Tuesday, alleging that Ayre and his partners were behind more than $100 million in illicit gambling winnings. Online gambling on sports is illegal under U.S. law, though it is legal in many other countries, including Canada.

None of the four people indicted have been arrested, as none of them are currently in the U.S. They face up to 25 years in prison.

Bodog.com was shut down Monday under a federal court order, and the page now redirects to a Homeland Security takedown notice. Other Bodog sites, such as Bodog.co.uk and Bodog.eu, continue to operate.

What has Internet freedom advocates worried is that Bodog.com was not registered in the United States, but rather in Canada, and the indictment against Ayre lists "the movement of funds outside the U.S." as a basis for the prosecution.

According to a report at the tech website EasyDNS, Bodog.com was registered through Vancouver-based DomainClip. However, all .com domains are ultimately managed through California-based Verisign, and it was this organization that was given a court order to shut down Bodog.com.

That raises the spectre of the United States extending its law enforcement to any organization whose online presence is in the .com domain. And many Internet activists are raising the spectre of individuals being charged in the U.S. for activities in other countries that aren’t crimes where they are located.

In Canada numerous organizations could be affected. For instance, all the major daily newspapers under the Canada.com brand -- including the National Post, Ottawa Citizen and Calgary Herald -- are on .com domains, as is the Toronto Star. The Tim Hortons website also has a .com address.

At the very least, the Ayre indictment shows those websites could be shut down on the order of a U.S. court.

At the end of the day what has happened is that US law (in fact, Maryland state law) has been imposed on a .com domain operating outside the USA, ” Mark Jeftovic wrote at EasyDNS. “[T]he reality [is] that US law can now be asserted over all domains registered under .com, .net, org, .biz and maybe .info.”

In a statement released on his website this week, Calvin Ayre argued the U.S. prosecution is at odds with international law, and meant to be a publicity stunt.

I see this as abuse of the U.S. criminal justice system for the commercial gain of large U.S. corporations,” he stated. "It is clear that the online gaming industry is legal under international law and in the case of these documents is it also clear that the rule of law was not allowed to slow down a rush to try to win the war of public opinion."

However, prosecutors will likely argue there were enough connections between Ayre’s business and the United States to justify prosecution in the U.S. even if the organization did not technically operate inside the country.

According to the Wall Street Journal, undercover law enforcement officials logged on to Bodog.com from inside the United States and were able to place bets on sporting events between 2006 and 2012. Bodog reportedly advertised on billboards, in magazines and on TV in the U.S. until a 2008 crackdown.

Bodog said in a statement this week that the company cancelled its agreement with the service provider who ran the Bodog redirect for U.S. visitors. But law enforcement officials alleged they were still able to access Bodog and place bets as recently as last month.

SOME OF THE WAYS WESTERN GOVERNMENTS ARE TRYING TO EXERT CONTROL OVER THE INTERNET

New Zealand: Parliament The First Victim Of Own Law?
1  of  6
PLAY
FULLSCREEN
ZOOM
SHARE THIS SLIDE 
New Zealand snuck in a three-strikes law against file-sharers as part of an emergency earthquake relief bill. The law, which will see Internet account holders cut off from the web if they receive three copyright violation notices, went into effect last week. Critics have said it violates due process because it doesn't allow the accused to defend themselves. Because the law targets account holders and not actual file-sharers, New Zealand's Green Party says Parliament itself could have its Internet cut off if any of the thousands of people who use the government's Internet use it for illegal downloading. An hour after the law went into effect, a Reddit user claimed to be doing just that.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST CANADA BUSINESS

 
 
  • Comments
  • 54
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
11:28 PM on 12/03/2012
The reason I used the word "facilitating" is because online gambling isn't illegal in Canada but it is in the US.
sbo333
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SocBeat
Bald and proud
04:42 PM on 03/02/2012
The US position seems to be that foreigners operationg legally within their borders are subject to US law if they deal with people in the US. One can only assume that they would consider the opposite to be fair play.

So if an American is operating legally within the borders of the US, but conducts business with a foreigner who is acting illegally by using the US service, the American should be subject to foereign prosecution.

That would include news organizations who provide news services for Amricans, but whose services are accessed in more restrictive countries, like China and much of the Middle East and Africa. That would include many sex-oriented sites. That would include Amazon, iStore, Audible.com, internet retailers, etc.

I'll be very interested in hearing the US position when the publisher of the New York Times is indicted in Lower Armistan and the extradition request comes in.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gx5000
Life's too short, be happy..
03:12 PM on 03/02/2012
F@cism fueled by greed, plain and simple....
The US has no business policing the Net, however unsavory I think Online Gambling is...
photo
TonyOnly
Truth matters.
10:06 AM on 03/02/2012
If you're going to do business in the American marketplace, your American transactions have to be in accordance with American law.

Seems pretty simple to me. Most countries are the same, including Canada.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
freddychef
Tue,4 Nov '14 Dems take House! & Majority Senate!!
12:37 PM on 03/02/2012
egit, they are not doing business in the usa, but americans are knowingly going against there own laws and are betting online (instead of a mafia bookie).
seems like this court is trying to take freedoms away from us people, while supporting the mafia
photo
TonyOnly
Truth matters.
05:56 PM on 03/02/2012
It doesn't matter if you're doing it from Mars, if you do business in the US marketplace you have to obey American law. Otherwise you're as guilty as the Americans who are knowingly breaking their own laws.

Just because you're doing it on the internet doesn't give you the right to break the laws of sovereign nations. If bodog had refused to take bets from people located in the US, then the American legal system wouldn't have been able to touch them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gx5000
Life's too short, be happy..
03:13 PM on 03/02/2012
The Internet is not an American Marketplace.....
photo
TonyOnly
Truth matters.
05:38 PM on 03/02/2012
Once you start to do business with people who are part of the American marketplace, then you are subject to American law as far as that business is concerned.

If bodog had refused to accept bets from customers located in the US, then the US legal system would not have been able to touch them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Runey
religion is why we can't have nice things.
09:49 AM on 03/02/2012
And they wanted to make it EASIER to take down any websites they wanted with SOPA and PIPA...

Police State here we come, digitally and otherwise.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Warren Yuill
Jesus Built My Hot-Rod
07:24 AM on 03/02/2012
Taunt the bull and you get the horn.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gravescanada
09:29 AM on 03/02/2012
Time to get out the cattle prods. USA needs to worry about itself and leave the rest of the world alone.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
freddychef
Tue,4 Nov '14 Dems take House! & Majority Senate!!
12:39 PM on 03/02/2012
except in this case, the bull is a castrated republican.
11:02 PM on 03/01/2012
This is ultimately garbage. I do not support the global takeover by the U.S.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JBSCanada
They paved Paradise and put up a parking lot!
10:55 PM on 03/01/2012
U.S. adults may well be breaking laws in their own jurisdiction - but it is their decision to do so. No one is forcing them. They are grown-up people. The U.S. not a nanny-state.

If this case is successfully prosecuted and a ruling is made to enforce it, it thereby sets international precedent of the highest order:

Can people of other countries then sue those U.S.A. companies which sell products or services to other countries? For instance, a handgun, ammunition, or fighter/bombers and their bombs?

"I want a million dollars because I was shot with an American-made bullet?"

"I want a free computer because my computer got an American-made virus?"

"I want a new car because my American-made car crashed because I was drinking American-made beer?"

It could get quite stupid.

It's always better to consider the consequences of one's actions, beforehand. That is what the American's should be teaching their citizens - and is what U.S. Attorneys should be telling the plaintiffs in this case.

Cheers! JBS
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JBSCanada
They paved Paradise and put up a parking lot!
10:55 PM on 03/01/2012
I could care less about online gambling.

I generally support law enforcement, but this is the most half-baked idea that has ever seen the light of day!

U.S. laws do not extend to any other country. The U.S. can not enforce laws outside of it's jurisdiction (meaning it's physical territory and foreign embassies/consulates and U.S. foreign military bases) and intellectual property, such as patents, copyrights etc..

Hosting a web domain is not physical or intellectual property of any sort.

Although the owner of the website - apparently Calvin Ayre in this case - may well display his own copyrighted or trademarked information on his website. No problem, that kind of intellectual property is recognized all over the world.

Cheers! JBS
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
yishai ettebe
08:58 PM on 03/01/2012
So what else will they add to this? That people who use .com will have to pay taxes to the IRS?
07:50 PM on 03/01/2012
Countries that sit back and allow the U.S. to trample over their sovereignty need to wake up and defend their beliefs. The dot.com domain is short for "commerce." Operated since 1993 by the National Science Foundation in the U.S. it has handed out these domains with increasing regularity as the commercialization of the internet became ubiquitous. Never has there been a stated position from the U.S. that persons or companies operating with a dot.com domain are beholden to U.S. law, and for good reason - they can't. The internet is considered, under international law, beholden only to laws within the boundaries of the owner.

However, what really makes the U.S. position one to laugh at and throw back in their face is what they consider their main contention - "the movement of funds outside the U.S." Maybe they should go ahead and set a precedent here if that means that the CEO's and upper management from every fortune 500 company with funds stashed in tax-free offshore accounts will be now held accountable - to this I say "GO FOR IT!"

Bullies will always be so until the lookers on gather en masse and kick the living shit of them, or as I once more eloquently heard it "power is never given. It must always be taken."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tony frm Banff
Search for truth,not spin
08:45 PM on 03/01/2012
very very good aurgument TP! Fand F
09:22 PM on 03/01/2012
won't happen. cause too much trouble and you're in their sights.
photo
TonyOnly
Truth matters.
07:39 PM on 03/01/2012
It's not the first time websites registered outside the US have been busted for this.
Website bets are no different than someone located in the US calling a bookie in Canada to place a bet over the phone. Regardless of Canadian law.

If you're facilitating the ability of people located in the US to break American law, then you can be subject to American prosecution.
The only question is, will your country of residence extradite you to the US to face charges?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TwoZeroOZ
08:45 PM on 03/01/2012
Your argument breaks down when you consider the fact that the Canadian bookie has broken no laws, and wouldn't be subject to American law...

This is why they could only charge him with "movement of funds..." - whatever that means.
photo
TonyOnly
Truth matters.
08:37 AM on 03/02/2012
Broken no laws in Canada, maybe. But if the book is dealing with customers located in the US, then he's broken American law. And is subject to US prosecution provided Canadian authorities are willing to extradite him. Which, except in death penalty cases, they are oblidged to under the treaties between the two countries.

If you want to access the American marketplace, you have to obey American law. Even if your company isn't located in the US.
photo
TonyOnly
Truth matters.
10:59 AM on 03/02/2012
The "movement of funds" angle allows them to seize Calvin Ayre's money. And once bodog.com is found guilty in American court, they'll get to keep it.

It may be overkill, but that's the way the US justice system operates.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JBSCanada
They paved Paradise and put up a parking lot!
10:13 PM on 03/01/2012
Following your line of reasoning TonyOnly;

Re: your statement; "If you're facilitating the ability of people located in the US to break American law, then you can be subject to American prosecution."

Q: If a German company (or individual) sells a handgun to an American and the American commits a crime with that gun inside the U.S.A., - the German company can be subject to American prosecution?

No precedent has been set on this to my knowledge.

I think these people are attempting to set a precedent, which will have many unexpected outcomes if successful.

For instance: If the U.S.A. enforces this ruling in court, thereby setting precedent, can other countries then sue the U.S.A. or it's corporations or it's citizens, because America has sold other nations handguns, ammunition - or... fighter/bombers with bombs, knowing full well what they are used for?

Nothing personal, just checking their logic on this. Cheers! JBS
photo
TonyOnly
Truth matters.
09:31 AM on 03/02/2012
The reason I used the word "facilitating" is because online gambling isn't illegal in Canada but it is in the US.

In order to be subject to US prosecution, whatever the transaction is has to fulfill 2 criteria.
1) The transaction itself has to be illegal according to US law.
2) At least one of the two participants in the illegal transaction has to be located on American soil when the transaction takes place.

There is precedent for this. A number of years ago, gambling websites based in the Carribean were shut down and successfully prosecuted in the US courts. And as SiameseTrainer mentioned, Marc Emery was busted by US authorities for using a website to sell pot seeds to US customers from Canada.

I suspect the significance of the California based .com manager Verisign is that it allowed the US authorities to immediately shut down bodog.com as soon as the indictment came down.

But no matter what website domain you're using, no matter where you're located, no matter what the laws are where you are, if you're targeting the US marketplace you have to obey American law. If not, expect to get busted.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Leader Newworldparty
07:35 PM on 03/01/2012
Read Boston University Law Review's paper on online gambling:

http://www.bu.edu/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/bulr/volume86n2/documents/HURTv4.pdf

Essentially, what it says is that online gambling and trading stocks are equally moral or immoral. The US ban on online gambling is more for protectionism than morality. Many state governments are the biggest promoters and operators of gambling. In other words, Boston U is stating that the US government is hypocritical.

The EU has claimed that the US is hypocritical in this regards as well:

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/eu-online-gambling-operators-file-complaint-against-us-for-discriminatory-practices-58829932.html

Also, the WTO has ruled against the U.S. anti-gambling laws as being unfair trade.
annyp
A Canuck, eh!
07:12 PM on 03/01/2012
It is too bad that the US wasn't more diligent in getting the taxes owed by their own corporations and Romney, that are off shore.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Johnny LaRue
political correctness is just incorrect
06:41 PM on 03/01/2012
Beware Nigerian royalty with your generous offers. Your next. Uncle Sam wants you!