Was Jay Cohen’s conviction justified?
Even though a huge chunk of humankind shares sheer disapproval of gambling, no matter in what form the latter comes, no one can actually help feeling slight ambiguity concerning the notorious Jay Cohen’s case. According to what the existing records say, Jay Cohen was accused of managing a gambling company in Antigua and Barbuda by the government of the United States according to the U.S. laws on gambling. Disregarding the controversy concerning the harmful effects of gambling, one might want to ask the question concerning whether the USA had the right to question the policies of other states, even on such a dubious issue as gambling.
We will write a custom Case Study on Jay Cohen’s Gambling Company and American Laws specifically for you
301 certified writers online
Therefore, Jay Cohen’s fault should be considered on the merits of its harmful effect on gamblers. From the given point of view, Cohen must be found guilty. Even taking the Antigua and Barbuda law on gambling, since the game was being held online, it should be regarded as an international event, in which case it must be in line with all existing laws on gambling. That being said, Cohen’s crime is obvious.
Do you concur with the dispute settlement decisions in the World Trade Organization in this case? The panel report? The appellate decision? The arbitration ruling?
I believe that in the case in point, the settlement decisions in the WTO seem excessively liberationist. While it is necessary to admit some freedom to private entrepreneurship, introducing ethics to their business practices is crucial as well. The Panel Report seems to fall into another extreme by supporting any initiative of private enterprises, which does not seem right either. The appellate decision concerning the USA government’s infringement of entrepreneurs’ rights seems legit in the given case, which, together with the arbitration’s ruling, made Cohen a victim of overly strict laws. The given outcome seems wrong, however. It is important to give freedom to private companies, yet it is essential to make sure that they do not abuse the freedoms.
Should Antigua And Barbuda have the right to retaliate against the United States by exporting copyrighted entertainment material? Is that a bad precedent?
The issue in question is, doubtlessly, a bad precedent, since no crime should be answered by another crime.
Should the United States have abrogated its commitment to gambling services under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS)? Did it have better alternatives?
In the given case, abrogating its commitment to gambling services under the GATS would have made the U.S. admit that the policy on allowing gambling must be launched, which would be rather undesirable. The U.S. might have taken much pressure off, yet it would have lost much of its reputation.
How can the dispute between the United States and Antigua and Barbuda be resolved now?
Since in the given argument, the USA represents a more radical and much harsher point of view on the issue, while Antigua and Barbuda regulators do not see the reasons for concerns about gambling, whether it is online or offline, the two states clearly represent two extremes concerning the gambling issue. At present, there are two possible avenues for the problem in question. The first solution would be to ban gambling as an activity. Another idea that can be used to approach the issue is to search for the compromise, i.e., impose even harsher restrictions on the gambling industry, such as raising the age at which a person can enter a game from the supposed eighteen to full twenty-one, as well as creating a series of PSAs concerning gambling and its effects.
Do you Support the proposed Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act? Why or why not?
I believe that allowing gambling is a regressive step that can be viewed on par with allowing online pirating. However, since at present, there is no alternative for the provided solution, the Internet Gambling Regulation can be viewed as a temporary solution.
Are current state and federal laws on gambling optimal? Should the nation move in the direction of stricter prohibition? Or should it move to more permissive laws, including those to legalize online gambling?
Designing the gambling laws, one must take into account the reasons that make people gambling, since blindly prohibiting or allowing gambling will result only in having even more casinos and online sites open, either as a protest or as a result of being allowed statewide. Therefore, it must be admitted that the current laws on gambling leave much to be desired. While it is a wise move to allow gambling, it is still required to control it, making sure that gambling will not sweep the entire nation.
While to provide democracy, one must make the laws on gambling more permissive, it is required to spread the word concerning its harmful effects, therefore, stressing that gambling, much like smoking, is a matter of one’s own choice depending on how one view his/her own personal development.