[stocktrader]

<< the DOJ tried to do CasinoCity.com - which is a huge network - this was a few years ago. CasinoCity did fight back and the DOJ backed down completly. DOJ didnt want to pursue it in court, like alot of the stuff they have done recently because they dont want to Lose a case and set a precedent.>>

Actually, that is not what happened at all. The DOJ did not make the first move by attacking CasinoCity. CasinoCity made the first move by attacking the DOJ and basically filing a pre-emptive discrimination-like lawsuit against the DOJ because of the DOJ's attitude about online gambling. Because online gambling is technically legal it would be harassment for the DOJ to keep people from gambling online. The judge dismissed CasinoCity's argument on the grounds that Casinocity specifically hadn't been hurt by the DOJ and therefore had no reason to sue, which was correct.

The legal grey legal area regarding online gambling benefits affiliates (no Vegas competition, other webmaster afraid to get into a grey area) but it also benefits the DOJ. The DOJ knows that if they were to force a poker affiliate to shut down we would bring it to court and could actually win (based on the fact there is no law banning online gambling and also on the WTO ruling). So the DOJ picks on the people they know won't fight back - like Yahoo/Google and print magazines. Google already shits piles of cash and could care less about the gambling PPC revenue they are losing so they won't fight back even though they know they are legally correct because Google won't spend money to fight the government over gambling. If online gambling were explicitly illegal though CasinoCity (and all of us for that matter) would have a legitimate case to bring against the US government but since there is technically no law prohibiting it they don't have a case and also can't sue the DOJ for harassing a 3rd party.