Banks Don't Like Idea Of Having To Pay For Crackdown On Online Gambling

from the wrong-focus dept

Wed, Aug 30th 2006 9:14am — Joseph Weisenthal

One of the problems with government regulations is that they don't exist in a vacuum; it's hard to implement something in isolation without causing unintended consequences. We've already seen this in the crackdown on online gambling, as the arrest of the BETonSPORTS CEO only served to keep industry executives from meeting in the US. Now banks are stepping up to oppose the anti-gambling measures before congress, citing a technical challenge in implementing a block on money transfers to gambling sites. The current system isn't designed to indicate what type of business is on the other end of the transfer, meaning a significant overhaul -- at the bank's expense -- would likely be required. Like issues of ISP liability for illegal activity done by their users, targeting banks places an undue burden on the wrong party. If the government insists on criminalizing voluntary online activity, then it should target the actual perpetrators, not companies that are ill-equipped to deal with the problem.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

21 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2006 @ 10:04am

...yeah... but...
I was hoping to sue all the banks that handle the money for the state gambling institutions...

I really wanted to use that to get the state controlled gambling institutions (Read: lotteries) shut down.. I really did..

Pooies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
neil, 30 Aug 2006 @ 10:12am

sounds simple to me if they implament a way to stop the transfers the sites just need to sell a 5 cent candy for your site credits + 5 cents and then you get site credits on a free game site then when your unhappy with your candy you simply return it for your site winnings + 5 cents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Debo, 30 Aug 2006 @ 10:21am

Legalize
Here's a novel idea....legalize online gambling and tax it. Hmmm.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Belligerent0001, 30 Aug 2006 @ 3:09pm
  
  Re: Legalize
  How DARE you.....How dare you make friggan sense!!!! If they legalize it they (the gov'ment) won't be able to bitch about not having enough money to give to those who don't want to work and or contribute to society....I am offended by your damn Vulcan logic! Legalize it...Shesh
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2006 @ 10:43pm
    
    Re: Re: Legalize
    Someone else said the Romulans don't tax it. I knew the Klingons didn't but was unsure about the Romulans. :)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
just me, 30 Aug 2006 @ 10:23am

doesn't really matter what the banks/government does. If people want to spend their money on a 10billion:1 chance...they're going to do it.

I think this mostly comes down to the fact that the government doesn't like competition to their money racket...The Lottery.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ryan, 30 Aug 2006 @ 10:27am

one of these days, somebody is going to invent the concept of personal responsibility and we'll see an end to stupid laws like this.

"oh, i lost my money on a flaky website... my bad, won't do that again"

sounds a lot better than the current

"oh, my kid took my credit card and lost it online... that's the online site's fault.. my govt should have protected me from that.."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2006 @ 11:05am

what about middle men like paypal. are they banks? western union? money transfer centers? would they fall into the law?

i've suggested taxing on many threads, however i have realized it's not that easy.

how would you tax company A located in the the united kingdom of go |= l_ l( |( 0l=l=. they don't have to follow US laws. and the US can't go after them, unless there is some extradition treaty, right? if someone could suggest a proper way to do this, i'd be for it.

however, i doubt there's a way to ensure that a site will NEVER be considered a gambling site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2006 @ 11:17am

How about the government keeping their nose out of people's business?

I'm curious though - would this include lottery sites or is that *not* gambling?

I'm glad I don't gamble at all - well, with money anyway. I'm pretty guaranteed to loose if I do anyway, lol.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bendodge, 30 Aug 2006 @ 11:20am

Surprise, Surprise
I've invented an Automatic Article Generator!

{
$article="Banks Don't Like to Pay For "+$hotbttnissue;
}

So this is news?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- dumbass finder, 30 Aug 2006 @ 12:32pm
  
  Re: Surprise, Surprise
  uh..yeah...dumbass.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
don't let the bookies know about me..., 30 Aug 2006 @ 11:28am

but the bookies....
From my understanding of Bet on Sports, wasn't it really like a social networking site where the users shared a common interest on sports lines (available in any sports page of a newspaper). It just happens that there are 2 types of users - the gamblers and the illegal bookies, and this site eases the meeting of the 2 parties?
Even though this activity takes place in cyberspace, isn't it still illegal for these bookies?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2006 @ 11:49am

here's the thing with "cyber crime" whos jurisdiction is it?

if i break a law in contry a, while me, and my servers are located in country b, where it is legal, am i really breaking the law?

i mean, you don't have to pay state sales tax for items purchases over the inet if you live in another state.

so...with that being said...it's like the grockster case. we don't host servers and what not of illegal music, we just wrote a program where people could share music. it's not our fault the users do illegal activities.

and no, id on't think loteries and horse betting will be deemed "evil" but that's only becuse the gov regulated them and get's a nice tax cut from them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Poker Wizard, 30 Aug 2006 @ 11:52am

Morality
When are governments going to figure out you cant make laws about moral issues. My house, my money, If I want to play, let me. I have worked for several online gambling companies and am a systems architect. The companies themselves regulate the industry betting than any government. In place like gibralter, the check the company has to go through are on the same level as nevada. The government just doesnt want competion. research some of the WTO issues on gambling with USA vs Antigua.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2006 @ 10:39pm
  
  Re: Morality
  it is not a moral issue- it is a corruption issue. the politican depend on their own gambling programs to bilk the public - lottery tickets and the heavily taxed horse tracks, dog tracks, and casinos. of course those industries also pay to keep the incumbants in power so the incumbenat protect them from overseas competition.
  
  the us is violating international free trade treaties when it does this- not just my opininion, but international courts have ruled.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cantalwayswin, 30 Aug 2006 @ 12:04pm

This will just lead to more sites like e-gold. Now countries like Romania, Switzerland and Isle of Man, that do not require personal information to be included with online payments.
Hmm... Anyone want to be my Romanian business partner?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 30 Aug 2006 @ 10:41pm
  
  Re:
  the Romulans don't tax it? i didn't know that, but heard the Klingons did. :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
chris (profile), 30 Aug 2006 @ 12:13pm

lotteries are not state gambling institutions
they are a tax on people who aren't good at math.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike, 30 Aug 2006 @ 12:27pm
  
  Re: lotteries are not state gambling institutions
  You're Math!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Louis, 30 Aug 2006 @ 8:34pm

Poker Ads
I don't know about you, but here, in Canada, I have noticed a very big increase in ads for online poker. Most of them are for site that don't support gambling, but they are a few that do, one even stating that they have given over a billion $ in winnings. And btw, most of these ads run on the american stations. If online gambling is illegal in the states, how can there be so many ads for online poker?

Just my $0.02
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HckyFght, 18 Sep 2006 @ 8:44am

Homeland Security?
What isn't being discussed here is the possible abuse of new Homeland Security laws that cover the transfers of monies between countries. The Nixon Administration hid behind "National" Security to use laws meant to protect Americans to simply go after its opponents. Now, these same dangerous idiots (Rumsfeld, Cheney, et al, were once Nixon proteges)are hiding behind "Homeland" Security to enact their backwoods, provincial, religeous agenda...oh...and go after their opponents. They've gotta go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]