Search

The article proposes that U.S. states adopt a Uniform Act to regulate sports gambling and have a more consistent and regulated sports gambling industry. Topics discussed include difference between online and casino gambling under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, history of the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), and the 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Murphy v. National Collegiate Athletic Association.

This paper examines the links between gambling, moral regulation, and politics in Canada. The proliferation of online gaming platforms has resulted in a new wave of gaming expansion, with online casinos and sports betting growing in market share over traditional land-based betting. Does Canada's Criminal Code and supporting regulatory scheme effectively address the problems posed by online gambling? This paper examines the origins and history of the gambling provisions in the Criminal Code and reviews their development over time through amendments and judicial interpretation. The paper then establishes how the Criminal Code provisions are applied to bets made over the internet. Next, it analyzes the legal issues around the Kahnawake Gaming Commission, an extension of a First Nation's claim to sovereignty and the most prolific online gambling regulator in the world. The paper concludes with ideas about the next steps in gaming regulation in Canada, suggesting the federal government is better suited than the provinces to provide and regulate gaming done over the internet. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The daily-fantasy-sports ("DFS") industry has been on a meteoric rise since its introduction in 2007. Led by market leaders DraftKings and FanDuel, DFS is a multibillion-dollar industry that has taken advantage of the advent of the Internet and the public's desire for more immediate results. Commercials and advertisements promoting huge payouts in exchange for small entry fees quickly garnered the attention of not only sports fans, but also many top state officials. DFS operators rely on the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act ("UIGEA") to argue that they are operating legally. Although UIGEA exempts fantasy sports from traditional internet-gambling regulation, there is no evidence to suggest that the drafters contemplated DFS. The questionable legality of DFS eventually caught up with the aggressive business models of DraftKings and FanDuel. Now, the DFS industry is backing state-by-state lobbying efforts to resolve the legal uncertainty. Arizona's Tribal-State Gaming Compact (the "Compact") further complicates the inquiry into whether DFS constitutes illegal gambling. Historically, Arizona has considered DFS a game of chance and therefore illegal gambling. In 1998, then-Arizona Attorney General Grant Woods opined that fantasy sports participation is illegal gambling. Several recent legislative attempts in Arizona to legalize and regulate DFS have been unsuccessful. The limits on what Native American tribes in Arizona can do are eliminated by a "poison pill" provision in the Compact if the state expands permissible off-reservation gaming. The triggering of the poison pill also significantly reduces tribe's obligation to share revenue with the state. Despite the Arizona ban on DFS, DraftKings received $48,742 from Arizona participants in 2014. Arizona consumers need protection in this growing industry and the failure to legalize DFS is depriving Arizona's economy of revenue. This Note recommends that Arizona resolve the uncertain legal status of DFS by passing legislation that would legalize and regulate DFS in Arizona while satisfying the countervailing interests of Arizona tribes. The solution this Note proposes incorporates the ideal definition of DFS, appropriate consumer protections, DFS operator licensing fees and taxes, regulatory oversight and compliance with the Compact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Gambling Issues is the property of Centre for Addiction & Mental Health and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study examines a series of US legislation and law-enforcement events during the October 2006-February 2014 period. These events relate to the online poker business; some of them are federal level restrictions ("bad news"), whereas the others are state level legalizations ("good news"). We measure the changes in the sample average price performance across each event date, and then test whether such performance changes differ between pre- and post-announcement 5-day sub-periods. The results indicate (a) the two "bad news" events to online poker are not statistically significant for the average change in stock prices of US brick-and-mortar gaming corporations; (b) as for "good news," the brick-and-mortar gaming stock prices gain significantly with the legalization of licensed online poker by the state of New Jersey and the similar cooperative agreement between Delaware and Nevada; and (c) stock price reactions are statistically stronger to the Nevada legalization and the Delaware-Nevada agreement. Our findings support the idea that the positive wealth effect of online poker on the traditional brick-and-mortar market is limited and state-specific rather than nationwide. This research does not support the hypothesis "online poker cannibalizes brick-and-mortar gaming.". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the burgeoning growth of esports, industry luminaries and entrepreneurs alike are attempting to create sustainable secondary markets that capitalize on the growth and success of competitive videogaming. One hotly contested issue in the arena of secondary esports markets is the legality of direct gambling on the outcome of esports matches. With recent developments in gambling law revolving around fantasy sports giants DraftKings and FanDuel, gambling on fantasy sports and direct matches has been thrust back into the public light. While gambling on sports (including esports) is currently extremely regulated and restricted, this Note advocates for the legalization of esports gambling as part of the larger arc of gambling law development in the United States. Esports, due to its nacensy, its well-developed internal checks and best practices, receptivity, global scale, and popularity presents an ideal vessel to continue the expansion and regulation of sports gambling in the United States. While extensive discussion is had on traditional sports gambling and the phenomena that is esports, academics rarely bridge the gap between the two. Rather than analyzing esports and sports gambling in separate vacuums, it is important to analyze them together; development of esports gambling would confer benefits both to esports as a whole as well as to the growth and regulation of traditional sports gambling in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the legality of Daily Fantasy Sports (DFS) which centers on an interpretation of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). It mentions Attorney General (A.G.) of New York wrote two cease and desist letters to DraftKings and FanDuel on November 10, 2015 which demanded that DraftKings and FanDuel immediately stop accepting wagers in New York. It also mentions allegations of employee misconduct and unfair use of proprietary information.

The recent economic crisis has brought into focus how even open and highly interdependent economies in the European Union try to govern their economies according to territorially defined interests. The aim of this article is to examine an area, online gambling, with the technological and legal conditions that challenge approaches that favour economic patriotism. The article compares two cases, the United Kingdom and Italy, that represent two different models of economic governance to argue that they are similar in which interests they seek to protect and at which level. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Online games that started off as games of luck, skill and patience have been transformed into pay-to-win games. Players with the deepest of pockets, who can purchase any in-game asset that would advance their gameplay, win. The game is no longer a game. It is being destroyed by the exploitation of commercial opportunities and the black market sale of ingame assets. It is turning into a business, pure and simple, and is depriving dedicated, skillful, and patient players of their expected in-game experience. Moreover, players are regularly discovering and exploiting new alleys through which to engage in these Real Money Trading ("RMT") transactions to avoid any transaction costs. A number of scholars have addressed the initial question of whether income is generated when in-game assets or currency are acquired. This Note addresses the more recent development of the extensive trading of these acquired assets or currency. Specifically, this Note addresses the consequences of large scale acquisition of in-game assets and currency as a business, and not as the byproduct of recreational activity. In doing so, this note addresses possible solutions through state regulation, taxation, and industry self-regulation. As the majority of RMT transactions occur between foreign and US players, these transactions are taxable in very limited circumstances. Therefore, this Note concludes that the most plausible way to deter gold farming and RMT transactions may actually be through industry self-regulation and not through legal means. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Online video gaming has become very popular in Japan as well as in the United States. One of the reasons for the increasing popularity of online video gaming is the availability of live game streaming. Live game streaming allows game players to upload live gameplay or live stream it online. It created the joy of sharing gameplay with other players and of watching other players playing a game. It is agreed that such activities are illegal copyright infringement in Japan. However, many game players upload live gameplay or live stream it online. Several platforms also actively solicit uploading and live streaming by game players. Apparently, these acts are tolerated because it is likely that they promote the popularity of video gaming and increase the number of players. These activities are "tolerated infringement," technically and theoretically illegal copyright infringement, which are tolerated by copyright holders. But do these activities really have to be copyright infringement? Do they also have to be illegal? This paper argues that the current situation is unhealthy and suggests copyright reform to deny that these activities constitute copyright infringement or to legalize them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When does work become play and play become work? Courts have considered the question in a variety of economic contexts, from student athletes seeking recognition as employees to professional blackjack players seeking to be treated by casinos just like casual players. Here, this question is applied to a relatively novel context: that of online gold farming, a gray-market industry in which wage-earning workers, largely based in China, are paid to play fantasy massively multiplayer online games (MMOs) that reward them with virtual items that their employers sell for profit to the same games' casual players. Gold farming is clearly a job (and under the terms of service of most MMOs, clearly prohibited), yet as shown, US law itself provides no clear means of distinguishing the efforts of the gold farmer from those of the casual player. Viewed through the lens of US labor and employment law, the unpaid players of a typical MMO can arguably be classified as employees of the company that markets the game. Viewed through case law governing when the work of professional players does and does not constitute game play, gold farmers arguably are players in good standing. As a practical matter, these arguments suggest new ways of approaching the regulation of so-called virtual property and of online gaming in general. More broadly, the very viability of these arguments shows that the line between work and play is not so much an empirical fact as it is a social one, produced by negotiations in which the law has a leading role to play. This insight contributes to an ongoing debate about commodification and play that grows more urgent as digital technologies suffuse the world's economy with gaming and its logic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on quasi-gambling nature of social gaming in the U.S. It highlights the social gaming site myVEGAS.com as an example of a business that attempts to enter the sector, with an emphasis on its terms of service. Other topics considered include the growth of secondary markets and the substantial income they generate in the digital marketplace and electronic currency, such as Bitcoin.

The article focuses on daily and weekly fantasy sports leagues in the U.S. It looks at the consideration of the U.S. courts of daily or weekly fantasy sports as closer to sports betting than the traditional fantasy sports leagues, along with the history of sports betting and fantasy sports in the country. An analysis and comparison of the legality of sports betting and traditional fantasy sports is also offered.

The article focuses on the legality of daily fantasy sports contests with the U.S. federal and state law that applies to daily fantasy sports contest. It mentions that U.S. federal laws such as Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 prohibits betting or wagering, Wire Act prohibits betting through wire communication facility and Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) authorize a betting or wagering scheme based on games in which amateur athletes participate.

The article focuses on the legality of the fantasy sports contests and its similarities with the illegal sports gambling in the U.S. It mentions the U.S. Congress passed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, which gave the power to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to come after the payment processors for funding illegal forms of gambling. It also mentions that future prospects of the daily fantasy sports industry.

The article focuses on the legality of fantasy sports and its exemption from gambling after passage of Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) as the fantasy contests constitute gambling under both federal law. It mentions that Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA) prohibits any person from operating a betting scheme in any competitive game. It also mentions that the federal Wire Act prohibits transmitting information involving wagering on any sporting event.

The article focuses on the misconceptions regarding the U.S. Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA) which regulates the transferring funds in unlawful Internet gambling and having the fantasy sports exemption. It mentions that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) officially published that Internet gambling was unlawful under the Federal Wire Act. It also mentions that the fantasy sports contests are games of skill, and therefore not gambling.

On October 13, 2006, President George W. Bush signed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) of 2006 as an attachmentto the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006. UIGEA is the first federal regulation specific to the online gaming industry. In this article, we examine the impact of UIGEA and its subsequent interpretation (through administrative rulemaking and Department of Justice actions) on the value of U.S. publicly traded firms in the gaming industry. We find that UIGEA is associated with an average increase in firm values in the gaming industry of approximately 2.86%. W e also find that firms with a greater percentage of revenue from retail gaming gained more from UIGEA. Finally, we document that the Justice Department's ruling on December 23, 2011, that not all gaming on the Internet is illegal, is associated with a positive 3.55% return. We conclude that allowed, regulated, controlled growth of Internet gaming is likely to provide significant value to the U.S. gaming industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2006, the U.S. Congress passed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) which prohibited financial institutions from processing transactions arising from online gaming activities, thereby severely hindering U.S. residents from participating in online casino games, primarily poker. Enactment of this legislation followed lobbying and political pressure from a variety of interest groups. By examining House roll call votes, we identify empirically the sources of political influence that resulted in passage of the internet gambling legislation. We find that party affiliation was of primary importance, with Republicans more likely to vote in favor of the bill. The percentage of constituents who are Evangelical Christians and also the number of gambling establishments in the district were positively associated with votes for the bill. However, contributions from the gaming industry decreased the probability a congressman would vote for the bill. ( JEL D72, L83) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information on the history, impacts and significance of laws regulating online gambling such as Internet poker under the provisions of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA). It examines the efforts of the U.S. Department of Justice in addressing the threats of the illegal gambling business resulting in conspiracy to commit bank fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering. It informs about problems faced by the U.S. States such as liquidity and commerce clause.

Purpose -- In the present epoch, when the witch hunt for victimless criminals continues apace and even increases, it is all the more important to protect our liberties. One of the purposes of the present paper is to do so with regard to gambling. Design/methodology/approach -- We use logical arguments (reductios ad absurdum) and empirical case studies to make the case that online or any other kind of gambling in general, and poker in particular, are justified uses of our freedoms. Findings -- We find that although poker, whether online or in any other format is under attack by the powers that be, the case for such initiatives is a weak one. Originality/value -- The value of this essay is to focus attention on yet another one of our liberties that is in grave danger of being obliterated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses several aspects of the regulation of online gambling in the European Union (EU), focusing on the Treaty of Lisbon, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), and various legal developments involving the national governments of EU Member States. Efforts to protect social interests and generate tax revenues in the EU are mentioned, along with fundamental freedoms and legal precedent in the EU. National sovereignty and several gambling law-related cases are examined.

The article discusses several legal developments involving Internet gambling in the U.S. as of November 2013, focusing on the nation's 1961 Wire Tap Act, the legal aspects of in-state lotteries, and poker-friendly legislation in American states such as Nevada and New Jersey. The U.S. Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 is mentioned, along with the nation's Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Delaware Gaming Competiveness Act of 2012, and the Nevada Gaming Commission.

A conceptual model is proposed that examines the potential influence of an online casino's atmospheric cues and functional qualities on consumerbehavioral response. A stimulus-organism-response (S-O-R) model, often used to frame other servicescape research, is adapted as the basis of the theory that the online casino environment will influence the organismic effects of cognitive and affective states, which in turn influence gamblers' approach or avoidance behavioral intentions. Theorized elements of the virtual stimulus include high and low task-relevant cues, financial trust, and gambling value. Personal and situational factors, as well as demographic characteristics, are proposed to moderate the relationship between the servicescape and organismic responses. Propositions and research implications are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses criminal sentencing and the role of punishment in crime deterrence in the U.S. Topics include the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, the severity of sentences given for white-collar crimes, and the assumption that lengthy prison sentences will deter white-collar criminals. A day known as "Black Friday" in the online poker industry is mentioned in which federal authorities in New York charged individuals with violations of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006.

After American legislators explicitly exempted fantasy sports from online gambling laws, legal theorists have debated whether or not playing fantasy sports for money warranted such an exemption. However, there is currently no survey-based research which has examined the relationship between gambling and the attitudes and behaviours of fantasy players. The current study surveyed 253 fantasy participants and separated respondents into groups based on whether or not they play fantasy baseball for money. Results indicate that those who play for money are increasingly motivated by the social benefits associated with participation and are not motivated by the opportunity to win money. This finding runs counter to research on traditional forms of gambling, which often reports strong anti-social tendencies associated with increased gambling along with a strong motivation for financial gain. Further, from the league and team perspective, those who play fantasy baseball for money actually exhibited higher levels of team-related consumption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the U.S. Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 (UIGEA), which prohibits unlawful gambling and the receipt of gambling proceeds. Topics include the closure of the online poker industry in the U.S. and the court's interpretation of skill and luck as dominant factors in the legal treatment of poker.

The article discusses April 15, 2011, a date dubbed by poker enthusiasts as Black Friday when the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued an indictment against PokerStars, Full Tilt, and Absolute Poker, three of the largest online poker websites, prohibiting the participation in online poker games. The author provides a background on the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforecement Act (UIGEA), used as a basis by the DOJ for the charges against the poker websites.