Gambling Bill Risky For ISPs
Story Filed: Monday, October 09, 2000 8:18 PM EST
Oct. 09, 2000 (ISP Business News, Vol. 6, No. 40 via COMTEX) -- By Eric Ladley
The odds are that a House bill designed to prevent gambling addicts from digitally rolling away their life savings could have
unpleasant effects on Internet service providers.
As of press time last Friday, it was still uncertain whether the bill, Rep. Bob Goodlatte's H.R. 3125, will pass before the
Congressional session ends next week. But if it does, it could open up ISPs to legal motions and possibly turn them into Internet
cops forced to patrol their users.
Goodlatte (R-Va.) already tried to speed the bill's passage up under a procedure where two-thirds approval was needed, and it
just barely failed. His press secretary says he will try to push it through before this session ends.
Critics of the bill, which range from conservative anti-gambling groups to ISP associations, say the bill could open ISPs up to
possible criminal penalties if they do not stop end users who are gambling online. Both sides agree that, if the bill passes, ISPs will
be required to block users and sites as law enforcement authorities demand.
Michelle Semones, Goodlatte's press secretary, says the bill never, to her knowledge, contained any provision stating that ISPs
must police their sites in search of end users plunking down money for gambling. However, she says that if a law enforcement
agency hands an ISP a court order asking it to take a site down or block it, the ISP in question would be forced to comply.
"Our biggest opponents have been gamblers and e-lotteries, but I do not know of any ISPs that are opposed," she says. "ISPs
were never asked to monitor or police their sites."
Semones was not able to provide a list of ISPs that support Goodlatte's effort.
The bill's passage could be tricky. Conservative groups that might be expected to support the legislation actually are divided
because the bill exempts dog racing, horse racing and jai alai. The Christian Coalition and Family Research Council are for the bill,
while the Free Congress Foundation, another conservative lobbying group, has come out against it.
Rep. Chris Cannon (R-Utah), who might be expected to support anti- gambling legislation, is opposing the bill because he says the
loopholes would allow horse and dog racing in Utah, where such activity is banned.
Cannon also fired a shot at the bill enforcement provision, which he says would negatively impact ISPs. On his Web site, Cannon
posted an e-mail form where people can electronically inform their representative that they are against the bill.
"Enforcement of the law is disturbing," Cannon says. "The legislation would make your ISP the enforcement agency. ISPs would
be required to take down or block any site that allows gaming. This means they will have to monitor the Internet surfing habits of
their customers. I believe this constitutes an invasion of our privacy that must be stopped."
Cannon's legislative director, Chris MacKay, says his boss is backing H.R. 5020, which would require the Justice Department to
monitor Web sites, not ISPs.
A gambling industry lobbyist close to the situation says the bill is in search of a policeman, and that Goodlatte is currently looking
at either ISPs or credit card companies to enforce the ban. Provisions in the bill that would make ISPs criminally liable for
gambling activity have been removed, the lobbyist says. But MacKay says that language making the ISPs criminally liable for
gambling sites and end users is not totally off the table, meaning ISPs could go to jail if they do not comply with the ban.
The lobbyist says the bill would require ISPs to take down gaming sites and could make them ID gamblers over a specific period
of time. And it would require them to conduct ongoing blockage of gambling sites and traffic to them.
One problem with this is it would give the federal government jurisdiction over the sites, even though gambling is a state-regulated
activity. The bill would most likely affect smaller ISPs that do not have the time or resources to spend on massive blocking and
tracking efforts. Most ISPs do not like the regulations the bill imposes, but have not come forward because they do not want to
appear to be in favor of gambling, the lobbyist says.
Barbara Dooley, president of the Commercial Internet Exchange, a lobbying group which includes ISPs, says language mandating
that ISPs actively patrol end users was taken out, but the bill, as it stands, opens ISPs to unlimited injunctions from law
enforcement agencies looking to enforce the gambling ban.
Dooley says the legislation is still written in a confusing manner and raises questions for ISPs.
"If this bill is not fixed, ISPs will have a very difficult time supporting passage," Dooley says.
Thomas Pearson, a research associate at Competitive Enterprise Institute, says the bill is insufficiently clear about how ISPs will be
affected.
"It is unclear whether Goodlatte will remove the provisions that would require ISPs to monitor their users' activities or those which
allow exceptions for certain types of gambling, such as jai alai, dog racing and horse racing," he says.
A warning sign that this bill could be too tough, Pearson says, is that Goodlatte borrowed language from the Internet Gambling
Funding Prohibition Act, H.R. 4419, a bill that died because of stringency.
Sen. John Kyl (R-Ariz.) guided his own Internet gambling bill through the Senate, and MacKay says the two bills are similar.
"ISPs, essentially, would have to serve as snoops," Pearson says. "The enforcement provisions are unclear, and, if it is to have any
teeth at all, it would require that ISPs act as cops and carry out law enforcement."
ISPs should be wary of any enforcement provisions, Pearson says, because they could require equipment that would slow
download times.
ISPs EarthLink [ELNK], PSINet [PSIX] and Verizon [VZ] declined comment on the bill. (Reps Chris Cannon and Bob
Goodlatte, 202/224-3121; Barbara Dooley, CIX, 703/709-8200; Thomas Pearson, CEI, 202/331-1010.) |
