quote:

Originally posted by NitroX:

As for all this fucking USA legal bullshit, the hunt and drawer is taking place in South Africa. If the Hunt agreement states, "this agreement is made under the jurisdiction of the laws of South Africa", you are entering into a hunt contract based in South Africa under South African laws, not the USA. You are probably sending your deposit to South Africa and it is banked there.

The internet is NOT THE USA!

Of course it is not. But if an American sees the ad over the internet and participates, then U.S. courts will feel free to get involved, like it or not. As I mentioned above, excluding Americans from participation would be the safest bet because the contract language you suggest will not work to protect the lottery operator.

OK Dan, the easiest way out is, I will offer to buy out the rights of any Americans who enter the contest for $1 each. If they win, I get the free buffalo hunt. Sounds fair to me.


PS Anyone who knows, knows the USA courts believe they have the right to make laws and judgements for the rest of the world, so you are not far wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by NitroX:
OK Dan, the easiest way out is, I will offer to buy out the rights of any Americans who enter the contest for $1 each. If they win, I get the free buffalo hunt. Sounds fair to me.


PS Anyone who knows, knows the USA courts believe they have the right to make laws and judgements for the rest of the world, so you are not far wrong.

Nitro

You ought to check this out with an Attorney in Aus. I think you may find that the same thing would apply over there. An Aussie can sue a person from another country for any number of reasons and for actions taken outside of Australia. Get a judgement, and collect upon that person or company's arrival in Aus.

Having been on the recieving end of such a suit I can guarantee you that it can be done. The neat thing about Aus law is the loser pays all expenses for both parties. Now if we can just get the losing Attorney to pay half for bringing a bad suit we will be doing good. (sorry dan )

Just out of interest

Seeing we are getting into (legal terms) and situations /

AccurateReloading server is based in VIRGINIA so does that mean Virginia Law takes precidence over USA Fedearal law !!!

I personally believe that where the server is located or where the AD is placed is irrelavent to a degree, it is surely where the actual lottery takes place and where the payment and contract is domiciled that is paramount //

Where the HELL is JUDGEG when we need him,

Us peasents mortals cant tell s..t from clay @ times, we need a higher power to put us right as to how the internet applies to advertising and to actual booking, as I believe they might be two completely different beasts in reality

In any event, there would be many easy ways to get around the (illegal lottery aspect) by using some cunning logic,

I think NitroX started the ball rolling with an idea or option to circumvent

Just out of interest ( off subject ) I live in NZ my internet ISP is in NZ their server is in California and the company I book for is in South Africa, now that is a minefield for the legal beagles to solve

( sincere apology for me origionally mentioning legality in this thread as now I am the guilty party for the ensuing fist fight )

Aint FREEDOM OF SPEECH GREAT

Peter

quote:

Originally posted by Mickey1:

You ought to check this out with an Attorney in Aus. I think you may find that the same thing would apply over there. An Aussie can sue a person from another country for any number of reasons and for actions taken outside of Australia. Get a judgement, and collect upon that person or company's arrival in Aus.

My limited studies at law in University and since then, say that the place of agreement is made, the place the transaction is performed, the place the advertising occurs and the place the payment is made are relevant factors in determining jurisdiction. Mabe some other factors.

The US courts have a considerably different attitude as to what their jurisdiction covers ie basically the entire Earth(!) from many other countries.

The USA may believe because the internet is available in the USA they have jurisdiction. Also the server and account this AR site is based at, is NOT in Dubai but in the USA.

quote:

The neat thing about Aus law is the loser pays all expenses for both parties.

Actually the magistrate or judge determines how much of the legal fees the winning party can recover from the loosing party, from the whole amount to nil. Winning a commercial case can still bankrupt you. The "blood suckers" always win (sorry Dan ).

Enough legal BS. Really I think grown men (and women) should learn to take responsibility for their own actions and not whine and run to lawyers when it doesn't work out for them. Maybe a bit naive.


***

quote:

Balla Balla

I think NitroX started the ball rolling with an idea or option to circumvent

My commission is 15% please.

OH silly me ///

I forgot to add ...

Has anyone on AR actually formally tested the LAW in Zimbabwe or South Africa lately in a real live court of law ...

GOOD LUCK and hopefully you have a lot of patience as the water flows slowly in Africa (-:

Keep taking the tablets and with a bit of luck you will get over the high fever prevailing in this thread

Peter

Lets buy some lotto tickets and then get ready to sue.


http://www.thelotter.com/map.asp

quote:

Originally posted by NitroX:

My limited studies at law in University and since then, say that the place of agreement is made, the place the transaction is performed, the place the advertising occurs and the place the payment is made are relevant factors in determining jurisdiction. Mabe some other factors.

When an ad is on the internet, the place of advertising is the place where the ad is viewed.

quote:

Enough legal BS. Really I think grown men (and women) should learn to take responsibility for their own actions and not whine and run to lawyers when it doesn't work out for them. Maybe a bit naive.

Everyone has to play by the rules of the game or potentially face the consquences for not doing so. Karl now knows what the rules are. If anyone does not like the rules, he is free to try to change them, and may eventually succeed.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
Actually, in most states of the U.S. this offer is illegal as a lottery (which is banned in some states and must comply with strict regulations in other states). In contrast, a free drawing (in which there is no entry fee, such as the purchase of a PG hunt) is legal.

So if a U.S. citizen takes advantage of this offer and does not win the buffalo, he can pursue the matter through either his state attorney general's office or a private attorney and the court will award damages, which would be the value of the buffalo hunt.

Cool!

So then, since I didn't win the AR buffalo hunt, any of the rifles that were used to raise money for it, or any of the other hunts & guns that have occassionally appeared here, I can now SUE somebody, and I get to hunt buffalo with all of my new rifles!

How sweet is that?!? And all this time I thought I was just putting money in, TAKING MY CHANCES, and watching some other lucky guy win.

Anybody got the number of a good attorney? (Maybe one that would go along on my hunt in exchange for payment?)

You gotta love America (and lawyers!!)

I still can't believe it. I'm going on a free buffalo hunt, just because I lost...

Nitrox,

Here is how it appears to stand in Australia:

quote:

In Dow Jones & Company v. Gutnick (HCA 56 Dec. 10, 2002), the High Court of Australia ruled that a U.S. defendant could be haled into a foreign court. The High Court ruled that the Australian courts have jurisdiction to try the Dow Jones Company, a U.S. corporation that publishes Barron’s, for libel. The High Court ruled that personal jurisdiction existed solely because the article in question, posted on the Barron’s Online website based in New Jersey, could be viewed on the Internet in Australia. The Australian High Court reasoned that:

"Harm to reputation is done when a defamatory publication is comprehended by the reader, the listener, or the observer. This being so it would be wrong to treat publication as if it were a unilateral act on the part of the publisher alone. It is not. It is a bilateral act in which the publisher makes it available and a third party has it available for his or her comprehension. "

I seem to recall we've had some drawings (or lottery, or contest, or fundraiser, or whatever they were called) around here before in the past couple years. I remember buying a ticket to for a chance at a buffalo hunt and I remember buying a chance on a rifle so Russell could shoot a zebra or something.

And I'm rather certain one of the previous buffalo hunt contest was being organized by a person here in Michigan and I doubt seriously if it was licensed by the Michigan Lottery Commission. I don't recall all this lawyer-speak back then, (thankfully!)...have the interpretations of the "laws" changed? Or is just because those previous things were popular therefore the laws overlooked. Do we have a case of selective flaming here?

IMHO, if you don't want to participate in the guys booking scheme, then just go to another thread and ignore it. He's not forcing anybody to participate nor do I read where he asked anybody for the legal opinions.

Matt,

As you know quite well, doing something once and getting away with it does not mean you can get away with it on repeat occasions.

Illegal?? Bullshit. You are paying for a hunt not to enter the drawing. That part is free. Nothing at all illegal about that.

Sounds like Walker has it figured out.

Just a drawing between loyal clients!

Les

quote:

Originally posted by Balla Balla:
Just out of interest

Seeing we are getting into (legal terms) and situations /

AccurateReloading server is based in VIRGINIA so does that mean Virginia Law takes precidence over USA Fedearal law !!!

Peter, the server is in Washington State. And I believe 500gr had it right about venue is where the page is viewed. So you can sue in NZ (good luck).

Don

Bunch of


Good luck with your hunts Karl.

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
Nitrox,

Here is how it appears to stand in Australia:

quote:

In Dow Jones & Company v. Gutnick (HCA 56 Dec. 10, 2002), the High Court of Australia ruled that a U.S. defendant could be haled into a foreign court. The High Court ruled that the Australian courts have jurisdiction to try the Dow Jones Company, a U.S. corporation that publishes Barron’s, for libel. The High Court ruled that personal jurisdiction existed solely because the article in question, posted on the Barron’s Online website based in New Jersey, could be viewed on the Internet in Australia. The Australian High Court reasoned that:

"Harm to reputation is done when a defamatory publication is comprehended by the reader, the listener, or the observer. This being so it would be wrong to treat publication as if it were a unilateral act on the part of the publisher alone. It is not. It is a bilateral act in which the publisher makes it available and a third party has it available for his or her comprehension. "

Fair enough. But I think common law might well only apply to libel, and it would need to be extended to cover "lotteries" or "law of contract".

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Balla Balla:
Just out of interest

Seeing we are getting into (legal terms) and situations /

AccurateReloading server is based in VIRGINIA so does that mean Virginia Law takes precidence over USA Fedearal law !!!



Peter, the server is in Washington State. And I believe 500gr had it right about venue is where the page is viewed. So you can sue in NZ (good luck).

But I want to sue Don!

Don't know why yet, 500grains might be able to find a good complaint for me.


***

Perfect image Ducklear

Nitrox,

I am sure you can sue Mr. C. for those defamatory comments he made about you on the infamous thread. And of course under the Oz system you would stand an excellent chance of getting attorneys fees. Since the U.S. respects Oz's legal system as fair and legitimate, you could then record the judgment in the U.S. and execute against Mr. C.'s assets located here.

So do you want a slightly used 45-70?

quote:

Originally posted by 500grains:
Nitrox,

I am sure you can sue Mr. C. for those defamatory comments he made about you on the infamous thread. And of course under the Oz system you would stand an excellent chance of getting attorneys fees. Since the U.S. respects Oz's legal system as fair and legitimate, you could then record the judgment in the U.S. and execute against Mr. C.'s assets located here.

So do you want a slightly used 45-70?

500grains

You lead the way. He is still making very derogatory and defamatory statements about both of us!


Personally I like the head-butt into nose method of satisfaction.

quote:

Personally I like the head-butt into nose method of satisfaction.

The time honored Glasgow Kiss method of Legal Jurisprudence and Law. Still revered, practiced and upheld by precedent in many regions of the civilized world.

DB

Hi All
I am changing the rules. I will give a buffalo hunt (or half a hunt) for free to a person booking a hunt directly with me, and not through an agent. I will determine the winner of the buffalo, or 50% of on a buffalo hunt winner as per my original post. This is not a lottery, and you are paying for the hunt, not to enter a competition. However, this competition is only open to my own customers.

How do we get an open season on lawyers with a 5/day bag limit?


465H&H

How about a all you can shoot, never closed season...

Shakespeare said sometime around 1600 AD (?)

"First thing, we kill all the lawyers."

Life hasn't changed.

(Sorry Dan )