Minnesota Sued Over Online Gambling Ban, While Frank Again Introduces Bill To Legalize It
from the know-when-to-hold-em dept
We noted several days ago that Minnesota was trying to force ISPs to block gambling web sites, going down a path trodden by several other states. That path, of course, has always ended in failure after the courts have weighed in. It looks like the courts will now get their chance to rain on Minnesotan politicians' parade, as a trade group has sued the director of the state's Department of Public Safety's Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement division to stop the ban. The group uses the suit to remind the director that he doesn't have the authority to mandate the blocking by ISPs, something the court will likely reinforce.Meanwhile, online gambling's biggest friend in Congress, Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, has again introduced legislation that would legalize and regulate online gambling in the US. It sounds pretty much the same as his earlier attempts, all of which have failed, and would take the eminently reasonable step of allowing Americans to gamble in a regulated environment where they're protected by rules and law, as opposed to the current situation where they're pushed into the gray market (or worse), and have no protection. Frank also says he'll introduce separate legislation that will stop the enforcement of the UIGEA, which says that banks must stop processing any transactions that fund online gambling. At least one big casino company seems to think Frank's got a good chance of finally getting his law through: Harrah's, which recently hired the former CEO of major online gambling company PartyGaming to head its online efforts ahead of legalization.
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
Filed Under: barney frank, gambling, minnesota, online gambling
Companies: harrah's, partygaming
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
What's in a name
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's in a name
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What's in a name
they just aren't taxing the deposits and each game you play online.
Yet! =]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What's in a name
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's in a name
>Gambling is just what it is, a gamble. Whether you do it
>through regulation or through the "gray market (or
>worse)" your dumb ass took the gamble so live with the
>consequences.
Actually, there's a huge difference. In a regulated environment, you know the odds and know the score. You can make informed decisions with this information.
In an unregulated environment, you could literally be playing against a programmer who is looking at exactly what cards you are holding, has complete control of the deck or even worse. That's NOT gambling, that's being cheated.
There IS a difference.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What's in a name
Vegas is legal, yet I always seem to end up with less money after leaving and they just keep building bigger hotels.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What's in a name
I'm Canadian so our government hasn't made it illegal. I gamble at a site that has a good reputation (prompt payments, good protection against cheating, etc). There is little incentive for a site to cheat its customers because online casinos are insanely profitable. However, there have been cases when *employees* for sites have been caught cheated customers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's in a name
I would agree that the primary motivation for legalization (aka regulation) would be tax revenue. I don't have a problem with that, per se, but I would prefer that the government just stop trying to be my nanny, period (even though I personally have no interest in gambling).
--
www.chl-tx.com (Thanks, BHO, for the wonderful stimulus you have given my business!)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jihad against internet gambling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: jihad against internet gambling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fwank Should Be Illegal
I live in his district and I am allowed to say this.
I also wish to apologize to the good people of the rest of the US for being unable to vote this fag out of office.
* Sh*t for Brains
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course, the main issue for our government is taxing the winnings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]