backtop

Internet U.S. Government Bans Online Gambling
Marcus Yam (Blog) - October 2, 2006 6:43 PM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 63 comment(s) - last by Fnoob.. on Oct 4 at 6:33 PM
Something tells us that it's no bluff

Relax, your World of Warcraft addiction is safe. Your Party Poker addiction, however, is in a bit of peril as U.S. Congress passed legislation to end Internet gaming (gambling). More specifically, the House of Representatives and Senate over the weekend approved a bill that would make it illegal for banks and credit-card companies to make payments to online gambling sites.

International online gaming companies PartyGaming Plc, Sportingbet, and 888 Plc are likely to pull out of the United States. According to this Reuters report, PartyGaming generates about 78 percent of its revenue from the United States, while Sportingbet gets about 62 percent there. More details from this Citywire story: 

Provisions in the bill, in a section labelled the 'Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006', outlaw the processing of payments between US gamblers and on-line gaming companies. Although the act makes unlawful the receipt by a gambling business of proceeds or money in connection with unlawful internet gambling, it does not clarify the definition of unlawful gambling. But PartyGaming says that if the bill is signed it will be practically impossible for it to provide US residents with access to its real money poker and other real money gaming sites.

Analysts say that this law won’t go unchallenged, but for now, President Bush’s signature looks to be the nail in the coffin.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Our governmetn
By sotti on 10/2/2006 7:01:38 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah we mired down in the middle east.

Energy costs are soaring.

Education and industry are down.

Lets pass a law to ban internet gambling.

Tax it and use the revenue to address any of the above problems? No the bible says gambling is bad and the US needs to be good christians and pass laws that follow the bible.

I'm moving to cananda.




RE: Our governmetn
By sotti on 10/2/2006 7:02:48 PM , Rating: 1
If daily tech can typo their posts, I can typo my subject line.


RE: Our governmetn
By PT2006 on 10/3/2006 1:16:53 PM , Rating: 2
Although, to be fair, dailytech can fix theirs and you cant


RE: Our governmetn
By jmunjr on 10/3/06, Rating: 0
RE: Our governmetn
By dice1111 on 10/2/06, Rating: 0
RE: Our governmetn
By dgingeri on 10/2/2006 7:35:42 PM , Rating: 2
btw, the bible does not say gambling is bad, anywhere. This is a common misconception due to the fact that hardline religious nuts equated gambling (which you have to do in one form or another in order to get ahead in life at all) with other activities and labelled them all 'bad'. These nuts were also the ones that worked to get alcohol banned, and succeeded for a while. (Didn't Jesus turn water into wine for a wedding celebration?)

The problem here, and the biggest reason I am for this law, is that the gambling sites require special software in order to play, and that software contains massive amounts of spyware. I have had to deal with it on 3 computers at work now, and one of those I had to rebuild twice, because those guys used their work computers to play Party Poker. Their passwords could very easily have been stolen and who knows what kind of people would have access to our sensitive data. There is also the little matter of me spending a day rebuilding the computer to get all the spyware off.

Now the good news: we can actually fire those people now if they continue to infect their systems with this spyware because it is illegal to gamble over the internet. HR and Legal were blocking us from making it a termable offense due to getting the language just right, and probably also because a senior VP was one of the major users of the gambling sites. In our current policies, it is a termable offense to do anything illegal with their work computers.

Quite frankly, I don't see anyone actually being able to enforce it, other than corporations firing employees for using their company computers to do it.


RE: Our governmetn
By Ard on 10/2/2006 9:45:29 PM , Rating: 2
You're slightly off with the firing thing (assuming your company doesn't have a non-work internet use policy). It's not illegal for you or me to gamble online, but rather for our credit card companies to make payments to gambling sites.


RE: Our governmetn
By sprockkets on 10/3/2006 10:09:42 AM , Rating: 1
Wrong. Gambling is a form of greed, wanting something for nothing, and that is clearly wrong.

Funny how again we will ban internet gambling just because it is foreign yet we will have local and nationwide lotteries, which is much worse than playing poker with friends for money. It is so nice for thousands to millions of people to play their lives away, and have so few winners. People say you have a better chance of getting hit by lightning than winning the lottery.


RE: Our governmetn
By deeznuts on 10/3/2006 1:04:55 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry but gambling is not wanting something for nothing. It can be greedy, yes, but you have to put something up (i.e. risk something) in order to receive a payout. There is nothing inherently wrong with that concept, but there is when it comes to abuse, just as there is with everything.


RE: Our governmetn
By udontknow on 10/3/2006 3:26:29 PM , Rating: 2
HA HA! Yea greed is definately the issue here! As in our govt is being greedy bc it cant accuratly tracking who is making what from internet gambling and no taxes are getting paid for the money thats being made and they can have that. thats what this is really about!


RE: Our governmetn
By MIDIman on 10/2/2006 7:53:42 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I'm moving to cananda.


See ya!


RE: Our governmetn
By hondaman on 10/2/2006 9:02:35 PM , Rating: 1
Dont let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya!


RE: Our governmetn
By TwistyKat on 10/2/2006 9:11:27 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I'm moving to canada.


Don't worry, the right-wing is imploding and the voters are now seeing through the neocon spin machine. Things should hopefully get back to reality after the election.


RE: Our governmetn
By RogueSpear on 10/2/2006 9:34:23 PM , Rating: 2
Now that the Republican party is starting to imitate the Catholic Church with regard to child molestors, they need to appear as though they're tough on some type of vice.

Too bad for Bill Bennett as this will certainly put a damper on his favorite hobby. How virtuous.


RE: Our governmetn
By 05SilverGT on 10/3/2006 12:57:18 PM , Rating: 2
Please had this been a Democrat they would have been like oh he needs help. He's a victim of blah, blah, and blah. I think the situation is being handled well. His guy lost his job, trust me had he not resigned he would have been ousted and now is seeking help.


RE: Our governmetn
By johnsonx on 10/2/06, Rating: -1
RE: Our governmetn
By jskirwin on 10/3/2006 8:37:40 AM , Rating: 4
quote:
I'm moving to cananda.


Don't let the doro hit you in the btut on the way otu.


RE: Our governmetn
By Flunk on 10/3/2006 9:26:03 AM , Rating: 3
Come on over. As long as you want to work you're welcome in Canada. We won't be biased against you because you don't agree with the government. We all that here, I think It's called free speech.


RE: Our governmetn
By GreyMittens on 10/3/2006 10:22:09 AM , Rating: 2
Well you'd better learn to spell it first :)


RE: Our governmetn
By Xponential on 10/3/2006 1:11:23 PM , Rating: 2
As an avid online poker player, I was a little disappointed that this article didn't really give all the facts. For a more detailed look at what this bill does and does not do, go here: http://cardplayer.com/poker_news/news_story/1428?c...


the way around it
By QueBert on 10/2/2006 8:04:27 PM , Rating: 1
This is already being done by a lot of on-line gambling sites. You send a Western Union to a person in some country like Peru or Bolivia. The person's name changes all the time so there are no noticable patterns. When they pick up the W.U. your account is credited with whatever money you sent. If you win, you get a Western Union sent back with the winning amount. Can the goverment stop this? not fvckin likely. As with the name and countries always changing I don't see how they could keep up. As soon as they caught on to Gloria Valez in Panama being a front name. It's now Hector Fernandez in Domician Republic.

All the goverment is doing by this, is escentially making it harder for people who want to gamble to gamble. And guess what? Most will still figure out a way! Web Site addresses and names will change, but using Western Union these companies are unstopable, and untracable.

good job G-Dub!




RE: the way around it
By marvdmartian on 10/2/2006 8:18:36 PM , Rating: 2
A far simpler, and safer, method would be for someone outside the USA to set up a safe online service similar to Paypal. You pay them, then pass on the payment to your favorite gambling site........and a heckuva lot more secure than sending WU to someone overseas! Nigeria, perhaps?? ;)

I'm sure this is more about the government feeling as though they couldn't tax the revenue well enough (to keep people from cheating them from the taxes) than anything else. What the government (ANY government, not just ours) can't tax, it makes illegal......or regulates it so it's not fun anymore!


RE: the way around it
By alcalde on 10/2/2006 9:39:14 PM , Rating: 2
>A far simpler, and safer, method would be for someone
>outside the USA to set up a safe online service similar to
>Paypal. You pay them, then pass on the payment to your
>favorite gambling site........and a heckuva lot more
>secure than sending WU to someone overseas! Nigeria,
>perhaps?? ;)

Good point, and such services already exist as some credit cards have already taken it upon themselves to disallow payments to online gambling sites. So in the end, this bill does nothing but make it more annoying for people to gamble online.


RE: the way around it
By pyrosity on 10/2/2006 8:21:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
good job G-Dub!


You know what? I disapprove of some of the president's decisions myself, but this really is an issue to raise with congress. Bringing Bush into this, to my knowledge, is inappropriate.


RE: the way around it
By Christopher1 on 10/2/2006 8:46:20 PM , Rating: 2
Why is it wrong to bring Bush into this? He was one of the most vocal advocates for a law making online gambling illegal, and he was the one that kept on pushing for Congress to make it illegal.

Frankly, the government needs to start butting out of all people's private lives, and that includes children's, as long as they are not doing things that physically harm others.

Sure, you will get someone who is hooked on internet gambling sometimes (very infrequently), but the vast majority of the people who online gamble and gamble offline do not have that problem.


RE: the way around it
By hondaman on 10/2/2006 9:12:53 PM , Rating: 2
Jeez. Here we go again. ITS ALL DUBYAS FAULT!!!!! Its a very common accusation from the uneducated and ignorant.

Bush had NOTHING to do with this bill. In fact, this bill has been in the works since 1997.

I agree that this is absolutely not the governments place to tell me what and where I can or cant spend my money, but to blame Bush for this bills' passing is moronic.

Taken from http://www.gambling-bill.com/bill_history.html

S 474 Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1997 Sen Kyl
--> Failed


HR 2380 Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1997 Rep Goodlatte
--> Failed


S 692 Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1999 Sen Kyl
-->Failed


HR 3125 Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1999 Rep Goodlatte
--> Failed


HR 4419 Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act Rep Leach
--> Failed


HR 3215 Combating Illegal Gambling Reform and Modernization Act Rep Goodlatte
--> Failed


HR 556 Unlawful Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act Rep Leach & LaFalce
--> Failed


RE: the way around it
By alcalde on 10/2/2006 9:41:27 PM , Rating: 2
Bush can receive part of the blame for sure, as long as he either signs it or allows it to pass into law without signature. Now how people like Jack Abramoff and casino lobbyists figure into all this is a more interesting question....


RE: the way around it
By GreyMittens on 10/3/2006 10:24:04 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe he'll veto it like he did with Stem cell research. /sarcasm off



RE: the way around it
By gramboh on 10/2/2006 8:40:54 PM , Rating: 2
It's called Neteller.


What a waste
By Rob94hawk on 10/2/2006 8:43:47 PM , Rating: 1
All these Ivy league educated people in congress and they come up with the most assinine laws. No wonder this country is so F'd up. No goddam priorities.

Steriods in baseball and gambling online seem to be more important than healthcare reform and illegal immigration.

Now you know why I'm not voting in 2008. No matter who you vote in they all suck.




RE: What a waste
By Christopher1 on 10/2/2006 8:51:04 PM , Rating: 3
Politicians have the habit of always going for the things, no matter how unharmful, that have the best chance of getting votes from people out of emotional or religious indignation.

From pedophilia, to school shootings, to homosexuality, to other things, they always focus on what is liable to get them the most votes when they are running for office.

They need to stop butting into people's, child and adults, private sexual lives by making things that a VERY FEW people find distasteful illegal, and start focusing on the real issues in the world today: climate change, world hunger, anti-biotic resistant diseases, STD's that are incurable, etc.

They need to find solutions for the REAL problems in the world today, instead of focusing on issues that only cloud the subject. The only way I see them doing that however, is if the president and Congress in bulk were elected EVERY YEAR, so that people would have a say and true power over their elected officials.


RE: What a waste
By splines on 10/2/2006 10:19:46 PM , Rating: 1
I don't see what this has to do with anybody's sex life.

Especially children.

Actually, why did you bring that up twice in comments about an artical on online gambling?


RE: What a waste
By 05SilverGT on 10/3/2006 1:01:23 PM , Rating: 3
Don't forgot other real issues like illegal immegration, the decine of any type of U.S. manufacturing, education in inner city areas to the list. If we could only get a majority of politicians with some balls go make a real decision. Even if it's one I don't agree with someone is taking a stand.


RE: What a waste
By Skanks on 10/3/2006 4:31:48 PM , Rating: 2
Pedophilia is an issue very few people find distateful? Children shouldn't be having sexual lifes private or otherwise........


What is everyones problem?
By Chillin1248 (blog) on 10/3/2006 4:02:55 AM , Rating: 5
Ok, I don't live in the U.S. (though used to) and am not a Christian, yet I see half the people here mouthing off about this being a religious ordeal with no basis at all. I mean where do you see gambling being illegal in the Christian Bible? Seems that a lot of people like blasting religion for some reason here for something that has nothing to do with it. If it was the Vatican City banning gambling then I can see some sort of connection, but this is the U.S. that doesn't even allow the ten commandments in court houses anymore (though ironically the seven laws of Noah are still a law).

I think people need to take a step back and see what they are really doing, which is blasting religion for no reason other than it being there. If George W. Bush was a Muslim would you then go on blasting the Quran? What if he was a atheist, would you then go blasting the Christian majority in the U.S.? I mean there has to be a limit somewhere, and you can't exactly with good conscience tell me that Congress is controlled by Christians.

More likely the blame lies with vetoing from the U.S. land based traditional gambling institutions who found online gambling to be a hazard for them, common sense I would think. Doesn't even have to do with any president at all, if Clinton was still in office this bill probably would have gone through as well.


-------
Chillin




By therealnickdanger on 10/3/2006 9:26:51 AM , Rating: 3
Chillin = nail on the head. This bill does NOT restrict people from gambling online. This bill was not brought up by President Bush. This bill also has nothing to do with right-wing, left-wing, or any other partisan lines.

There have also been a lot of comments about how we have better things to do, like health care, social security, etc. Hasn't anyone been paying attention for the past 4 billion years? We are continually working on these things, show some appreciation for the variety. LOL


Last minute rider
By dreddly on 10/2/2006 7:01:35 PM , Rating: 3
That's because Frist attached it to the port security act and passed it right before this session lets out and they lose control. It is really an underhanded and last minute effort to criminalize something that Frist promoted (B&M) in his own state.

I am surprised I have not seen more coverage of this.




RE: Last minute rider
By The Boston Dangler on 10/2/2006 8:25:32 PM , Rating: 4
And that's how things are done in our US of A.

This bill is an example of government for sale. Who prospers? The domestic gaming industry, because they were totally oblivious to online business models, just like the RIAA/MPAA. Internet gambling will return soon, firmly in corporate hands.


:Sigh:
By Crysalis99 on 10/2/2006 7:09:10 PM , Rating: 1
Im 110% against this bill. It is a shame the hippies gave up in the 60's. Because if they hadnt and if they would have suceeded, we wouldnt have to worry about our government fucking us with that red, white, and blue dildo...

I mean come on, its legal to gamble in the US..why not online? And dont give me that "Well underagers are doing that!" Because underagers bought alcohol off the internet and, although limited, we can still do that (although some one could inform me if they are cashing in on the taxes through online sales of wine).
You wanna make the claim that they are trying 'help' normal citizens with addictions, i say screw that because that isnt thier true motives. They are just pissed because they are cashing in through the taxes. Our country and its leaders disgust me!




RE: :Sigh:
By dgingeri on 10/2/2006 7:12:26 PM , Rating: 2
all I have to say is:

FINALLY!! WOOT! NO MORE SPYWARE LADEN GAMBLING PROGRAMS ON CORPORATE COMPUTERS!!!


RE: :Sigh:
By Burning Bridges on 10/3/2006 3:46:26 AM , Rating: 2
Couldnt you just block the sites?

Oh, and if there weren't any computers for you that needed fixing, you would probably be out of a job =P


RE: :Sigh:
By dgingeri on 10/3/2006 9:59:58 AM , Rating: 2
oh, believe me, I have more than enough work to do without having to rebuild systems that people have messed up with other software. the software we have works badly enough to keep me in a job for a long, long time. (90% of the software problems we have are due to non-MS software, so don't say it's MS's fault.) 250 people are difficult to take care of with only 3 support staff.


Moral Extremism
By Fnoob on 10/2/2006 7:31:46 PM , Rating: 2
Yet another market frightened oversees.

At least those of you opposed have been enjoying the tax revenue...




RE: Moral Extremism
By Tewt on 10/3/2006 10:40:31 AM , Rating: 2
Can someone set me straight on what I'm reading? It sounds like the companies are currently based in the USA and people access them online to gamble. That means jobs for US citizens and taxes for the government. They are now moving overseas but US people will still be able to access the gambling sites?

If I am reading this correctly, this benefits the US economy how? It sounds like the supposed [gambling] problem still exists but now the US cannot benefit from employment and taxes.


RE: Moral Extremism
By Fnoob on 10/4/2006 6:33:46 PM , Rating: 2
That was exactly my point. At least one person gets it... thank you.


DUH
By Gigahertz19 on 10/2/2006 9:11:10 PM , Rating: 4
You Donkeys apparently didn't read anything about it.

"House of Representatives and Senate over the weekend approved a bill that would make it illegal for banks and credit-card companies to make payments to online gambling sites."

Duh that's why sites like Neteller exist. Their the middle men between your bank account and the poker site you play on. Transfer money from your bank account to Neteller then from Neteller to poker site. Nothing changes.....I've been doing that ever since I started playing poker...most credit companies already won't let you transfer money directly from your bank account to the poker site.




RE: DUH
By Wwhat on 10/2/2006 11:51:15 PM , Rating: 1
Oh poker is gambling too?
I thought it required some smarts/skill.

BTW, in europe and other places they also try to make laws against online gambling, why they are all on that bandwagon I still don't get.


RE: DUH
By Wwhat on 10/2/2006 11:54:30 PM , Rating: 1
P.S although in this country they made laws against gambling on foreign sites to protect local gambling outfits from competition I understand, they dare to openly say so, what a world eh, it makes all people sick and all politicians happy to live their disgusting dreams.


.
By fishmonger12 on 10/3/2006 3:35:40 PM , Rating: 2
This won't do anything to stop online gambling. Already, banks and credit card companies do not pay money to gambling sites. You have to put money in an online account like Firepay, then transfer the money through Firepay to the gambling site. Since the gambling sites are usually located on some island in the carribbean, and the online wallets (for lack of a better term) are also, I don't see how this puts a stop to internet gambling.




RE: .
By AncientPC on 10/3/2006 8:06:32 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong, most online poker rooms still operated with US customers because it was a legal grey area. Now that the government has explicity condemened online gambling, many poker sites have deactivated US accounts including:

Party Poker
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/LSECWS/IFSPages...

Pacific Poker
http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2006/10/0...

Cryptologic Network (Interpoker, Caribbean Sun, PokerPlex, TotalBet, UKBetting, William Hill)
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/061002/0168318.html

Boss
http://investors.bossmedia.com/index.php?p=press&i...

Party Poker pulling out is a huge blow, and many other sites are on the fence until this thing gets passed into law and/or how the Department of Justice will choose to enforce it or not.


RE: .
By Parkerl75 on 10/4/2006 1:15:08 PM , Rating: 2
The Safe Port Act

"Prohibition on acceptance of any financial instrument for unlawful Internet gambling

No person engaged in the business of betting or wagering may knowingly accept, in connection with the participation of another person in unlawful Internet gambling..."

That makes the gambler and not just the gambling site liable if you do receive a payout from even a third party transaction processor.

If this law goes into effect, then it's the end for internet gambling. After Bush signs it, it will go into effect in 270 days.

It's amazing that they still make exceptions to "high-brow" gambling such as horse racing and etc. but don't consider online poker and gambling sites in the same level.

For the full text:

http://www.rules.house.gov/109_2nd/text/hr4954cr/h...

One Catch:

The law says "Intrastate Transactions", where the bet is initiated and received entirely within one state and does not involve interstate transaction, is not considered "Illegal Internet gambling" according to the definition, as long as it follows the state's gambling laws and complies with some federal requirements.


Finally!
By TheDoc9 on 10/3/2006 10:02:37 AM , Rating: 2
You guys who oppose this need to wake up. This is great news because online gambling is complelty unregulated and is open to not only cheating by the casino's, but cheating by players as well in the card games.

If you want online gambling your either (1) a cheater (2) an online casino manager or (3) have never gambled online.




RE: Finally!
By daveyd on 10/3/2006 12:47:56 PM , Rating: 2
Do you have any evidence of such "cheating"


By rcc on 10/3/2006 11:53:20 AM , Rating: 2
Should there be a law. Probably not.

Should it be necessary to have a law, no.

As someone said. "The lottery is a tax on people that can't do math".

I'd have to expand that to include online gambling in particular, and gambling in general.

Don't get me wrong, I like to shoot craps in Nevada every couple years or so. But it's entertainment, and the money spent/lost falls into the same category as a trip to Disneyland.





By Xponential on 10/3/2006 1:12:22 PM , Rating: 2
As an avid online poker player, I was a little disappointed that this article didn't really give all the facts. For a more detailed look at what this bill does and does not do, go here: http://cardplayer.com/poker_news/news_story/1428?c...


gay
By ttnuagadam on 10/2/2006 7:32:59 PM , Rating: 3
thank GOD we have the morons in congress to keep us from spending our money on things we like to do.




At last!
By vertigo1 on 10/2/2006 7:20:27 PM , Rating: 2
Fan-bloody-tastic, at last some sense!




By exdeath on 10/3/2006 3:54:36 AM , Rating: 2
Interfering with commerce.

They can regulate it, maybe in the form of imposing restrictions on monies spent per time period to stop stupid people from blowing all their money at once, but they can't outright ban it.




Good!
By mindless1 on 10/3/2006 2:33:10 PM , Rating: 2
I can't feel sorry for the something-for-nothing crowd who tries to make money gambling instead of applying time towards things constructive and valuable enough that society finds it useful enough to PAY them.

If you just like to play these games, that should be enough to play without real money involved. It's not like this is Vegas, where you have an entire environment besides the actual gambling. If you are upset, tough! Gambling has only a negative effect on society and while I can accept it wouldn't be banned entirely, it should not be available in poorly or non-regulated and taxed froms on the internet.




Waste of time...
By Einy0 on 10/2/06, Rating: -1
RE: Waste of time...
By Burning Bridges on 10/3/2006 3:49:36 AM , Rating: 2
I was going to agree with you, but then I read
quote:
Let's rename the USA the United States of Christian Bullshit!

and I realised you where an idiot.


RE: Waste of time...
By abochman on 10/4/2006 11:32:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
and I realised you where an idiot.


But at least he might know the difference between where and WERE.


RE: Waste of time...
By 05SilverGT on 10/3/2006 1:02:51 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed, this is a total waste of tax payer money. There are so many other things to address before this.


"There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." -- Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer

DailyTech Poll
Do you use copy/paste on your smartphone? 




16 Comments







botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki