Results tagged “internet gaming” from Center for Gaming Research

Prosecutors Claim Internet Gaming Ads Violate Local Laws

            Here's a quote that should scare anyone involved with any form of legal gaming.

            The federal Department of Justice ("DOJ") got Google, Microsoft and Yahoo to agree to pay $31.5 million in fines to settle claims that they had promoted illegal gambling by running ads on the Internet.  The DOJ announced that the fines were "for corporate conduct the government found in violation of the Federal Wire Wager Act, federal wagering excise tax laws, and various states' statutes and municipal laws prohibiting gambling."

            The DOJ has subtly, but greatly, expanded its war of intimidation against Internet gambling.  It has openly declared that it has the right to file criminal charges against anyone who violates any state or municipal law.

            Of course, every state, city and county has laws against gambling.  Nevada, for example, actively prosecutes illegal bookies and anyone else who operates commercial gambling without the necessary licenses.

            And every state and municipality has laws against advertising illegal gambling, and often, even legal gambling.

            A Georgia law, for example, makes it a crime to "knowingly print, publish, or advertise any lottery or other scheme for commercial gambling."  An Atlantic City casino that allows residents of Georgia to register online for a poker tournament might be violating this statute.

            In a case that it later criticized, but did not expressly overrule, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Puerto Rico could prohibit casino advertising to its residents.

            The Supreme Court also declared that it was constitutional for Congress to limit television and radio state lottery commercial broadcasts to states with state lotteries.  That is still the law today: A Las Vegas T.V. station might lose its license if it airs an ad for the California State Lottery.

            However, in the Greater New Orleans Broadcasting case, the Court ruled that it did indeed violate the First Amendment for Congress to prohibit a Louisiana-licensed casino from advertising on Louisiana T.V. and radio stations.  The main problem was that the prohibition was irrational, since identical, but tribally-owned, casinos could broadcast their commercials.

            As a nice twist, one of the lawyers for the American Gaming Association in the Greater New Orleans Broadcasting, arguing for the right of casinos to advertise, was my former classmate, John Roberts, now Chief Justice of the United States.

            Ironically, it was the DOJ that expanded the decision, by announcing that it would no longer go after any casino broadcaster under federal law, even in states without licensed casinos.

            But the DOJ never said it would not enforce state prohibitions on gambling ads.  And the Supreme Court has never said those state statutes are unconstitutional.

            The good news is that there is so much legal gambling in the country now, that it would be difficult to defend a state law that prohibits the advertising of legal gaming from another state.  And the Internet, like television and radio waves, cannot be kept out.

            It is possible that DOJ is once again merely beating its chest, and not intending to go after any more online advertisers.  And it's not even clear if local laws do apply to the Internet.

            Still, if I were in charge of a licensed casino, I would have my lawyers look again at my web advertising, with an eye on avoiding "various states' statutes and municipal laws prohibiting gambling."

END

#08-19 © Copyright 2009.  Professor I. Nelson Rose is recognized as one of the world's leading experts on gambling law.  His latest books, Internet Gaming Law (2^nd edition just published), Gaming Law: Cases and Materials, and Blackjack and the Law are available through his website, www.GamblingAndTheLaw.com.

Minimum Age To Bet On The Internet

            About every other week I get asked, "What is the minimum age to gamble on the internet?"  Usually these are from college-age students, who know how to make sports bets or play poker online -- and, in fact, are already doing it from their dorm rooms -- but get worried they will be busted if they win.  But, I've even been asked by agents of government and law enforcement, including police, prosecutors and regulators.

            Unfortunately, there is no easy answer.  This is mainly because law-makers have not thought about Internet gambling at all, let alone a minimum age.  If legislators have considered betting online, they have made it illegal.  And if it is illegal, there cannot be a minimum age:  You might have to be more than 21 to buy an alcoholic drink.  But even if you're 22, you not suppose to be buying (non-medicinal) marijuana.

            But there are some guidelines.

            The first place to look for a minimum age to make bets online is with the operator.  Some countries that license Internet gaming require that no bets be taken from anyone under 18 or 21. 

            Other jurisdictions say that it is up to the operator to set the limits.  Many put the minimum age at 21.  This doesn't necessarily make it legal.  But it does make it hard for prosecutors to claim the operator is targeting children.  And it prevents additional charges from being leveled, such as "contributing to the delinquency of a minor."

            But some operators take the position that they cannot police the world.  Just as they will take bets from everywhere, they say that the minimum age is whatever the law says it is where the player is located.  These online operators put into their terms and conditions that it is the duty of the player to determine whether it is legal to bet money online, which would include checking to see if local lawmakers have imposed a minimum age.

            The problem is that even lawyers would find it difficult to say what their local law is on the minimum age to play poker on the Internet.

            Take California, for example.  The State Penal Code makes it a crime to allow anyone under 18 to "play at a game of chance," in "any house used in whole, or in part, as a saloon or drinking place."  But, tribal casinos almost always limited poker to 21-year-olds, because the state-tribal compacts allows 18-year-olds to play only when no booze is available.  The state's licensed cardrooms also won't seat anyone under 21.  The State Legislature recently enacted a law allowing charities to run poker tournaments; again, the minimum age was set at 21.

            But, do any of these laws apply to an overseas operator taking bets from California?  Probably not. 

            State law makes it a crime to run a commercial poker game if you are not licensed.  But it is not clear that even this law applies.  There is a strong presumption that a law does not reach beyond a state's borders unless it says so, and this prohibition on poker never mentions having operators or other players outside California.

            The funny thing about all this is that the students asking the questions have a better chance of winning the World Series of Poker than of being arrested for playing poker online.  But, there is actually some small danger in betting from a dorm room.  Colleges have rules against gambling, especially if you are using a school computer.

            And the schools don't care if you are over or under 21.

                                                                          END

#08-10 © Copyright 2009, all rights reserved worldwide.  Gambling and the Law® is a registered trademark of Professor I Nelson Rose. His latest books Gaming Law: Cases and Materials and Internet Gaming Law (2^nd edition is about to be published) are available through his website, www.GamblingAndTheLaw.com.