Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government The Internet Your Rights Online

Government Delays New Ban On Internet Gambling 143

Posted by Soulskill
from the twenty-bucks-says-they-extend-it-again dept.
The Installer writes with this quote from the Associated Press: "The Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve are giving US financial institutions an additional six months to comply with regulations designed to ban Internet gambling. ... The delayed rules would curb online gambling by prohibiting financial institutions from accepting payments from credit cards, checks or electronic fund transfers to settle online wagers. The financial industry complained that the new rules would be difficult to enforce because they did not offer a clear definition of what constitutes Internet gambling. They had sought a 12-month delay in implementing provisions of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act that Congress had passed in 2006. ... US bettors have been estimated to supply at least half the revenue of the $16 billion Internet gambling industry, which is largely hosted overseas."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Government Delays New Ban On Internet Gambling

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28, 2009 @12:09PM (#30254920)

    Its nothing to do with right or wrong. Its just because US gambling businesses are losing money to overseas gambling sites.
    The ban was done on "moral" grounds. If its morally wrong to gamble over the internet why do they allow betting on horses etc?

    The WTO has repeatedly told the US to stop this (or at least change it so the same rules apply to everyone) after Antigua
    complained. I haven't heard anything new since Antigua applied to the WTO to remedy this (by getting an exemption to copyrights
    on US goods I believe).

  • by ShakaUVM (157947) on Saturday November 28, 2009 @12:11PM (#30254928) Homepage Journal

    >>Is there any American out there who can explain to me how it's somehow "wrong"

    There's been a long, long history of considering gambling to be a social evil. To a certain extent, I sympathize with it, as I had a friend inherit a house, move to Vegas, and a year later have no house. He runs a fish store now, in Bakersfield. (Bakersfield!)

    That said, I think the government should only be involved in online gambling to prevent fraud and enforce contracts. (You know, the main reason why government should be involved in any business - enforcing the rule of law.)

  • by click2005 (921437) * on Saturday November 28, 2009 @12:20PM (#30254968)

    A site called zookz tried this. $9.99 per month for unlimited downloads of 1500 movies & 50000 music tracks.
    They claimed a WTO ruling allowed them to do this. It disappeared after about 3 days.

  • by fatray (160258) on Saturday November 28, 2009 @01:43PM (#30255470)

    Anti-gambling advocates would claim that telling customers "you can win" is itself fraud.

    This may be true of casino gambling where you play against the casino and the game is designed so that the odds favor the casino. There are forms of gambling where you play against the other players and the casino only books the bets--for a fee. Those are poker, sports betting and horse racing (and possibly others that I'm not remembering). Poker and sports betting are beatable for the skilled player. I'm not sure about horse racing because the tracks (+etc) take a pretty large cut of the action as their fee.

    I think that poker and sports betting are the majority of on line gambling and their fees are much smaller than real world poker rooms or sports bookies. Therefore, you actually have a better chance of winning if you do this on line(this rash statement has a lot of implicit assumptions, such as the competence of the competition is the same in both venues).

"I have more information in one place than anybody in the world." -- Jerry Pournelle, an absurd notion, apparently about the BIX BBS

Working...