IMBRA and Yahoo Meetic

[Jamie76 0]

I used this site and eventually found my fiancee. I did pay for the site, but it's not just a site where you meet foreign women. There are many American women on there as well. Would this site fall under IMBRA?

[Turboguy 6]

No, Yahoo and Match are exempt from IMBRA because 50% of their business or more is matching people from the USA

[pushbrk 12,892]

No, Yahoo and Match are exempt from IMBRA because 50% of their business or more is matching people from the USA

That's part of the reason and reason enough for not qualifying as and IMB but the rest of the reason is that they charge everybody the same membership fee. They do not charge for "introductions" or to facilitate communication and they don't treat international members differently from domestic members.

Dating websites are not required to calculate the domestic versus international "matchmaking" statistics that result from membership to their websites. They aren't required to even know about any matches made and have no way of knowing unless they receive an unsolicited email noting some kind of success.

Membership type "dating websites" are not marriage brokers by any definition of marriage broker.

[Danno 1,228]

[

Membership type "dating websites" are not marriage brokers by any definition of marriage broker.

I think there are Dating websites which do fall under the IMBA.

There are a ton of sites where you buy contact info. Typically the girls are free and the guys pay. Typically the guys are US citizens and the girls are always foreigners.

If one were to use a site such as Bride.RU where you simply buy an address, you would fall under the catagory of using a Marriage Broker.

Even free sites such as Freepersonals.RU I think might fall under this catagory.

As the law is now confirmed in the courts, we shall see exactly what thier interpretations are.

Edited May 27, 2007 by Danno

[Turboguy 6]

FreePersonals.ru is probably ok. You didn't pay for the address and they charge the man and the woman the same thing (nothing). They would not be an IMB

[pushbrk 12,892]

I think there are Dating websites which do fall under the IMBA.

There are a ton of sites where you buy contact info. Typically the girls are free and the guys pay. Typically the guys are US citizens and the girls are always foreigners.

If one were to use a site such as Bride.RU where you simply buy an address, you would fall under the catagory of using a Marriage Broker.

Even free sites such as Freepersonals.RU I think might fall under this catagory.

As the law is now confirmed in the courts, we shall see exactly what thier interpretations are.

I don't understand what you mean by "fall under IMBRA". IMBRA applies in some way to all K visas regardless of how the couple meets. I said, "Membership type 'dating websites' are not marriage brokers." They aren't. You give the example of a "sites" where members don't simply arrange their own dates but "buy" contact information. That is exactly what separates them from what isn't and what is, a marriage broker.

A membership dating site charges all members a membership fee whether they only look at pictures and read profiles, arrange for casual sex with local members, seek long term relationships or marriage or whatever they decide to do with their membership.

Marriage Brokers charge for brokering marriages.

[Turboguy 6]

I believe the wording of the law excludes sites that do not charge and religious based organizations so there are exceptions. I have no idea how they would deal with a site that has both free and paid addresses. If you got a free one it should be excluded but since they charge it might not be.

[pushbrk 12,892]

I believe the wording of the law excludes sites that do not charge and religious based organizations so there are exceptions. I have no idea how they would deal with a site that has both free and paid addresses. If you got a free one it should be excluded but since they charge it might not be.

Also excluded from the definition of IMB are dating websites whose primary business is not international and who charge all members the same membership fee regardless of country and regardless of whether they ever make contact with anybody or regardless of whether their contacts are domestic or international.

For instance, I met my wife on a website I had met and dated several local and one out of state woman. I paid a single membership fee, just like everybody else. The site is not an IMB by any definition. You just post a profile and make or receive your own contact with other members without regard to their location. The vast majority of the members are in the US.

[Danno 1,228]

<<<I don't understand what you mean by "fall under IMBRA". IMBRA applies in some way to all K visas regardless of how the couple meets.>>>

-Pushbrk

---------------

What I meant was; Fall under the vague definition of what constitutes a Marriage Broker.

After reading the wording over and over, I think it is worded loosely for a reason and that reason is to include any dating agency which facilitates the "American coming" in contact with the foreigner, whether it is face to face or by "other means".

You may think all these companies selling contact info are exempt because they are not involved in physically bringing people together but it comes down to the definition of "Meeting".

If two people "Meet" via email through a web site, is not that web-site a facilitator?

What is the practical difference between me walking into a agency looking through their catalog, paying 30 bucks for meeting a local lady or me doing the same thing with the same business on the internet from a hotel room down the block?

It all amounts to the same thing and if you are correct, it is even easier to skirt the law than I thought.

At this point a couple can claim they met on yahoo chat and how could it be disproved?

If you are correct the agencies only need to eliminate the storefront part of the business for USA customers.

[pushbrk 12,892]

<<<I don't understand what you mean by "fall under IMBRA". IMBRA applies in some way to all K visas regardless of how the couple meets.>>>

-Pushbrk

---------------

What I meant was; Fall under the vague definition of what constitutes a Marriage Broker.

After reading the wording over and over, I think it is worded loosely for a reason and that reason is to include any dating agency which facilitates the "American coming" in contact with the foreigner, whether it is face to face or by "other means".

You may think all these companies selling contact info are exempt because they are not involved in physically bringing people together but it comes down to the definition of "Meeting".

If two people "Meet" via email through a web site, is not that web-site a facilitator?

What is the practical difference between me walking into a agency looking through their catalog, paying 30 bucks for meeting a local lady or me doing the same thing with the same business on the internet from a hotel room down the block?

It all amounts to the same thing and if you are correct, it is even easier to skirt the law than I thought.

At this point a couple can claim they met on yahoo chat and how could it be disproved?

If you are correct the agencies only need to eliminate the storefront part of the business for USA customers.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. Words mean things. The IMB definition in the law, in and of itself is vague but there are other paragraphs that further clarify what is NOT an IMB. The exceptions DO exclude some business concerns who facilitate USC's meeting foreign nationals. The discussion is about which ones. You seem to disregard the exceptions out of hand. That's not useful to a meaningful discussion on the subject, IMO.

[Danno 1,228]

<<<I don't understand what you mean by "fall under IMBRA". IMBRA applies in some way to all K visas regardless of how the couple meets.>>>

-Pushbrk

---------------

What I meant was; Fall under the vague definition of what constitutes a Marriage Broker.

After reading the wording over and over, I think it is worded loosely for a reason and that reason is to include any dating agency which facilitates the "American coming" in contact with the foreigner, whether it is face to face or by "other means".

You may think all these companies selling contact info are exempt because they are not involved in physically bringing people together but it comes down to the definition of "Meeting".

If two people "Meet" via email through a web site, is not that web-site a facilitator?

What is the practical difference between me walking into a agency looking through their catalog, paying 30 bucks for meeting a local lady or me doing the same thing with the same business on the internet from a hotel room down the block?

It all amounts to the same thing and if you are correct, it is even easier to skirt the law than I thought.

At this point a couple can claim they met on yahoo chat and how could it be disproved?

If you are correct the agencies only need to eliminate the storefront part of the business for USA customers.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. Words mean things. The IMB definition in the law, in and of itself is vague but there are other paragraphs that further clarify what is NOT an IMB. The exceptions DO exclude some business concerns who facilitate USC's meeting foreign nationals. The discussion is about which ones. You seem to disregard the exceptions out of hand. That's not useful to a meaningful discussion on the subject, IMO.

-----------------------------

IF there is a *failure to communicate* (G_d I love that movie) the failure must be on my part because I think I understand you pretty good.

I do recognize the exceptions; any typical US dating site would be exempt but most foreign dating sites work a little different and that is why I think

on several grounds (according to the definition given), they fall under the scope.

Here are the elements which I draw from which lead me to believe any person would have to answer *YES* (on question 19 of form 1-129F).... if they have met their partner through any of the typical Foreign bride dating site. (even if no agency is involved)

1-129f

"The term INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKER MEANS any business (etc) that charges fees for... ,snip> social referrals between United states citizens, ....... and foreign national clients by providing PERSONAL CONTACT INFORMATION OR OTHERWISE FACILITATING COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN INDIVIDUALS."

Did you get the... "Otherwise facilitating communication"??? That leaves the door open to any and everything which is not covered under the exemptions.

Exemptions are -

Traditional Matchmakers

Not-for Profit religious sites

Businesses which do not provide international dating as a primary principle of business.

Do you really think the people who wrote this law did not study the various business models which exist in the Mail order bride field?

They were not going to let the law only cover Marriage agencies but rather any and every means that businesses use to facilitate men meeting foreign ladies.

Perhaps someone could offer websites which they feel are not of such nature that a person could answer *NO* to question 19 after reading the above?

[pushbrk 12,892]

<<<I don't understand what you mean by "fall under IMBRA". IMBRA applies in some way to all K visas regardless of how the couple meets.>>>

-Pushbrk

---------------

What I meant was; Fall under the vague definition of what constitutes a Marriage Broker.

After reading the wording over and over, I think it is worded loosely for a reason and that reason is to include any dating agency which facilitates the "American coming" in contact with the foreigner, whether it is face to face or by "other means".

You may think all these companies selling contact info are exempt because they are not involved in physically bringing people together but it comes down to the definition of "Meeting".

If two people "Meet" via email through a web site, is not that web-site a facilitator?

What is the practical difference between me walking into a agency looking through their catalog, paying 30 bucks for meeting a local lady or me doing the same thing with the same business on the internet from a hotel room down the block?

It all amounts to the same thing and if you are correct, it is even easier to skirt the law than I thought.

At this point a couple can claim they met on yahoo chat and how could it be disproved?

If you are correct the agencies only need to eliminate the storefront part of the business for USA customers.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. Words mean things. The IMB definition in the law, in and of itself is vague but there are other paragraphs that further clarify what is NOT an IMB. The exceptions DO exclude some business concerns who facilitate USC's meeting foreign nationals. The discussion is about which ones. You seem to disregard the exceptions out of hand. That's not useful to a meaningful discussion on the subject, IMO.

Businesses which do not provide international dating as a primary principle of business.

Do you really think the people who wrote this law did not study the various business models which exist in the Mail order bride field?

They were not going to let the law only cover Marriage agencies but rather any and every means that businesses use to facilitate men meeting foreign ladies.

Perhaps someone could offer websites which they feel are not of such nature that a person could answer *NO* to question 19 after reading the above?

You have misquoted the line beginning with "businesses" above. If you quote it correctly, and interpret it literally, you'll see why Yahoo and the website I described and used are not IMBs.

Those are two examples of the many. You're welcome.

[Danno 1,228]

-Pushbrk

---------------

What I meant was; Fall under the vague definition of what constitutes a Marriage Broker.

After reading the wording over and over, I think it is worded loosely for a reason and that reason is to include any dating agency which facilitates the "American coming" in contact with the foreigner, whether it is face to face or by "other means".

You may think all these companies selling contact info are exempt because they are not involved in physically bringing people together but it comes down to the definition of "Meeting".

If two people "Meet" via email through a web site, is not that web-site a facilitator?

What is the practical difference between me walking into a agency looking through their catalog, paying 30 bucks for meeting a local lady or me doing the same thing with the same business on the internet from a hotel room down the block?

It all amounts to the same thing and if you are correct, it is even easier to skirt the law than I thought.

At this point a couple can claim they met on yahoo chat and how could it be disproved?

If you are correct the agencies only need to eliminate the storefront part of the business for USA customers.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. Words mean things. The IMB definition in the law, in and of itself is vague but there are other paragraphs that further clarify what is NOT an IMB. The exceptions DO exclude some business concerns who facilitate USC's meeting foreign nationals. The discussion is about which ones. You seem to disregard the exceptions out of hand. That's not useful to a meaningful discussion on the subject, IMO.

Businesses which do not provide international dating as a primary principle of business.

Do you really think the people who wrote this law did not study the various business models which exist in the Mail order bride field?

They were not going to let the law only cover Marriage agencies but rather any and every means that businesses use to facilitate men meeting foreign ladies.

Perhaps someone could offer websites which they feel are not of such nature that a person could answer *NO* to question 19 after reading the above?

You have misquoted the line beginning with "businesses" above. If you quote it correctly, and interpret it literally, you'll see why Yahoo and the website I described and used are not IMBs.

Those are two examples of the many. You're welcome.

Unfortunately the document would not allow me to copy and paste, hence my shortened version.

I never at any time said Yahoo or similar US sites were considered Marriage brokers, in fact I pointed out several times they did not fall under that classification, and I mentioned the fact that a person could "Claim" to have met through that exact site to eliminate answering "YES" on question 19......so I am not sure how I left you with that impression.

I am inclined to agree with Turboguy that a site such as "freepersonals.ru" is exempt too because it charges NO fees.

[pushbrk 12,892]

Unfortunately the document would not allow me to copy and paste, hence my shortened version.

I never at any time said Yahoo or similar US sites were considered Marriage brokers, in fact I pointed out several times they did not fall under that classification, and I mentioned the fact that a person could "Claim" to have met through that exact site to eliminate answering "YES" on question 19......so I am not sure how I left you with that impression.

I am inclined to agree with Turboguy that a site such as "freepersonals.ru" is exempt too because it charges NO fees.

Here is the exact wording.

an entity that provides dating services if its

principal business is not to provide international dating

services between United States citizens or United

States residents and foreign nationals and it charges

comparable rates and offers comparable services to

all individuals it serves regardless of the individual’s

gender or country of citizenship.

The meaning is far different from your paraphrase.

So, for instance a dating site that has as its primary business to allow say, asian women and men from all over the world to post their own profile, and contact the asian women, does not have as its principal business providing international dating services between USC or US LPRs even though it is primarily for international dating. The other stipulation is that such an exempt dating service would be one that charges comparable rates and services to all individuals regardless of the gender or country of origin.

Edited June 7, 2007 by pushbrk

[Danno 1,228]

Perhaps your experience has lead you to a different conclusion than my (limited) experience has.

I have not come across one dating site which is typically for international dating/ marriage in which the ladies pay.

Sure there are domestic sites (yahoo Match, Lava life) which have a number of scammer profiles listed but come on .... you think the average girl in China, Philipeans or Russia has 25 or 40 bucks a month to spend on a dating site? How would they even pay... Most of these girls from these countries do not even have a credit card.

Granted there are "dating sites" in other countries which are not aimed at foreign guys, typically in the native language in which a foreign person may join but these sites are a drop in the bucket out of the total number of couples who meet to marry on the internet (in my opinion).

But my understanding of what a "Marriage broker" is according to the definition has not changed, it applies to nearly every business which makes money connecting people from the USA to foreign girls, in any form.

While I know anything in life is POSSIBLE ...lets deal with the real world

I still welcome the posting of a few websites which are rich with foreign girls and guys from the USA which you think would not get a "YES" on question 19.

The only ones I know of are the totally free ones.