Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Gambling, The Next Great Internet Industry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kidl who wrote (823)	11/21/2002 8:31:30 AM
From: Herc	Respond to of 827

Well, still no signs of them sneaking a bill through. I remember John Conyers was one of the chief opponents of the Goodlatte bill during the brief debate allowed two years ago. I am kind of getting the impression that the congressmen who have studied this issue concede that a ban is futile. So when can I buy my lotto tickets online?

To: kidl who wrote (823)	11/23/2002 10:33:22 AM
From: Herc	Respond to of 827

Not only did no bill get out and Mitch McConnell is the Senate majority whip, but Trent Lott is the Senate majority leader. And he's from the Miss. gulf coast which has big time casinos. So not to worry. And the Bush justice department's interpretation of the Wire Act just bans INTERSTATE internet gaming transmissions. Maybe John Ashcroft will be caught in bed with a live boy or a dead woman, which is the famous joke from our Gov. Edwin Edwards. He's now in prison.

To: kidl who wrote (823)	11/25/2002 7:52:49 AM
From: Herc	Respond to of 827

The WSJ's previous condescending stance on gambling has changed. This is from today's editorial section. Zowwie! <<Bingo! By RUSS SMITH I'm a disappointed man. Actually, worse, I'm a disappointed New Yorker. Michael Bloomberg, my mayor -- contrary to his own admirable business career -- hasn't contributed one creative idea in office. But on the assumption that the mayor doesn't want his city to resemble Newark a year from now, I offer a suggestion that hasn't even been considered, at least publicly, in his cubicle at City Hall. It's time that gambling become legal in Manhattan; and I'm not thinking merely of slot machines at the corner bodega. Rather, the establishment of casinos -- Las Vegas-style -- in locations like Times Square and the West Side piers would immediately yield revenue that's so vital in the current depressed economy. Think this through: Tourism, which has suffered enormously, is bound to increase dramatically, drawing not only tri-state visitors, but tour groups from the rest of the country and overseas. While there's no shortage of legalized gambling in the U.S., the lure of New York could be expected to trump say, Missouri. The majority of these casino patrons would be casual gamblers, who'd typically spend three hours pulling slots, playing blackjack or roulette and then retire to a nearby hotel. Broadway, restaurants, galleries and retail outlets would inevitably see an uptick in business. Gambling opponents cite organized crime as a reason to nix casinos in the city. Excuse me for stating the obvious, but the mob is still well-entrenched in New York, as any business owner can attest to. Another objection is rooted in morality, a ludicrous position considering that panhandlers, three-card-monte sharks and other undesirables already roam the streets looking for easy prey. New York, "the city that never sleeps," hardly resembles a Utah community. Currently, Massachusetts's governor-elect Mitt Romney, a Mormon, is contemplating legalized casinos as a means to cut his own state's deficits. Not surprisingly, the Boston Globe is opposed to the idea, calling it "fool's gold." It's likely Mr. Romney will prevail, despite the provincial naysayers. Mr. Bloomberg, on the other hand, hasn't even discussed the issue. In my mind, that's a dereliction of his duties. Mr. Smith is editor-in-chief of the New York Press, for which he writes the "Mugger" column.>>

To: kidl who wrote (823)	12/22/2002 2:39:17 PM
From: Herc	Respond to of 827

This is from the Times-Picayune. I honestly think the gaming industry can take the initiative on this issue, and government will have to follow. But the gaming industry is taking a wait and see attitude. <<Online casinos await Congress' hand 12/22/02 Rebecca Mowbray Congress may be forced to tackle Internet gambling issues when it convenes in January after a decision by a federal appeals court in New Orleans last month said casino-style gambling over the Internet is legal under existing federal law. Two plaintiffs had filed a class-action lawsuit alleging MasterCard, Visa and other financial services companies profited illegally by processing illegal online bets, and the two sought to have their gambling debts forgiven. But the lawsuit was dismissed, and in November the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans affirmed that dismissal. The lawsuit tested whether the 1961 Interstate Wire Act, which prevents illegal sports betting across interstate telephone lines, could apply to the Internet gambling. The U.S. Justice Department and others have previously interpreted the law to say the Wire Act extends to casino-style gambling on the Internet, and the Wire Act has become the primary act for deeming Internet gambling illegal. But the 5th Circuit upheld an opinion by the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Louisiana that said the law applies only to sports events such as games and contests, not card games or other casino-style gambling. "Because the Wire Act does not prohibit nonsports Internet gambling, any debts incurred in connection with such gambling are not illegal," the appeals court decision said. The two original plaintiffs "simply are not victims under the facts of these cases. Rather, as the district court wrote, 'they are independent actors who made a knowing and voluntary choice to engage in a course of conduct.' In engaging in this conduct, they got exactly what they bargained for: gambling 'chips' with which they could place wagers." Obviously a blow to opponents of Internet gambling, the ruling could help fuel the continued growth of the $4.09 billion online gambling industry. Though online casinos are based outside the United States in places such as the Caribbean or the Isle of Man, about half the customers are in the United States. But experts say U.S. gambling companies are still reluctant to step into Internet gambling without more clarification from the federal government and from states on the legality of online casinos. The question is, should the federal government ban Internet gambling to protect people from runaway gambling in their homes, even though enforcement will be difficult? Or does should the government accept Internet gambling but regulate it? "I think the next step in the Internet gambling debate is going to be whether or not to regulate," said Michael Tew, vice president of gambling equity research at Bear Stearns, a New York investment firm. "I think they're still going to be reluctant to move forward until they have clarification on the federal level of the Wire Act and exactly what it means for Internet wagering." Nelson Rose, a gambling law expert at Whittier Law College in California, said those clarification efforts will take place in both Congress and in states where the gambling industry is important. Immediately after the 5th Circuit decision, Rose said, Nevada passed a law saying Nevada casino companies could operate on the Internet as long as they didn't take sports bets, and turned the matter over to the Nevada Gaming Control Board to draft specific rules. So far the Nevada gambling board has not moved forward on the matter. Meanwhile, several Internet gambling bills that died in Congress are likely to be reintroduced, Rose said. During the congressional session that just ended, the House of Representatives debated two bills to update the language of the Wire Act to prevent most forms of online gambling. It passed a different bill, HR 556, sponsored by Rep. Jim Leach, R-Iowa, that would have banned financial institutions from accepting online gambling transactions. But the bill died when the Senate failed to take up the matter before recessing. In late November another bill, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., was introduced that called for creating a commission to study Internet gambling and how to regulate it. That bill also died with the congressional recess, but Conyers plans to reintroduce the matter. Rose thinks the Conyers bill has the best chance to pass, but that still means the much-needed congressional clarification could be several years away by the time a committee studies the issues and recommends a course of action>>