<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Sports-ticket options?	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2006/01/sports-ticket-options/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2006/01/sports-ticket-options/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 14:34:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Ted		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2006/01/sports-ticket-options/comment-page-1/#comment-1896</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ted]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:54:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=2981#comment-1896</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I assure you that, for decades, entrepreneurs have engaged in all sorts of financial arrangements to profit from gambling/wagering without &quot;getting any money&quot; other than a transaction fee, and that this has not deterred  the Department of Justice from pursuing the arrangements.

If, by site-user, you&#039;re talking about the person wagering, that person is placing a $27 wager that, if his team wins, he will obtain the right to purchase a ticket (worth much more) at face value.  You can see why this would be considered gambling if one were to replace &quot;if his team wins&quot; with &quot;his raffle ticket will be pulled&quot;: the DOJ wouldn&#039;t allow one to sell interstate raffle tickets over the web, either, even if the prize is merely the option to pay face-value for tickets.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I assure you that, for decades, entrepreneurs have engaged in all sorts of financial arrangements to profit from gambling/wagering without &#8220;getting any money&#8221; other than a transaction fee, and that this has not deterred  the Department of Justice from pursuing the arrangements.</p>
<p>If, by site-user, you&#8217;re talking about the person wagering, that person is placing a $27 wager that, if his team wins, he will obtain the right to purchase a ticket (worth much more) at face value.  You can see why this would be considered gambling if one were to replace &#8220;if his team wins&#8221; with &#8220;his raffle ticket will be pulled&#8221;: the DOJ wouldn&#8217;t allow one to sell interstate raffle tickets over the web, either, even if the prize is merely the option to pay face-value for tickets.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: asg		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2006/01/sports-ticket-options/comment-page-1/#comment-1895</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[asg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:35:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=2981#comment-1895</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I don&#039;t understand -- how can it be an attempt to dodge the anti-gambling laws, if the site-user never gets any money?  (The two outcomes you describe both involve the customer paying up -- $167 or $27 depending on whether WVU makes the final four.)
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t understand &#8212; how can it be an attempt to dodge the anti-gambling laws, if the site-user never gets any money?  (The two outcomes you describe both involve the customer paying up &#8212; $167 or $27 depending on whether WVU makes the final four.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
