Slashdot Mirror
WA Law Means Linking to Gambling Websites Illegal
tpoker writes "Following a previous story on Washington State making online gambling a felony, the Seattle Times reports that the first legal salvos have begun. 'The first casualty in the state's war on Internet gambling is a local Web site where nobody was actually doing any gambling. What a Bellingham man did on his site was write about online gambling. He reviewed Internet casinos. He had links to them, and ran ads by them. All that, says the state -- the ads, the linking, even the discussing -- violates a new state law barring online wagering or using the Internet to transmit 'gambling information ... Telling people how to gamble online, where to do it, giving a link to it -- that's all obviously enabling something that is illegal.'"
Maybe this will provide some legal leverage to go after people who spam blogs and forums with adds for online poker, etc?
The same Seattle Times printed my letter to the editor on the same subject today.
...any discussion whatsoever of rape, incest, murder, drug use, etc. must also be illegal.
Reminds me of when AOL added the word "breast" to their filters without thinking through the consequences. All the members of a breast cancer group suddenly had to start referring to themselves as survivors of "hooter cancer".
not to mention common sense. As much of the information (other than reviews) on his site could be easily found using a search engine, I'm not really sure how collecting it on one site could be illegal. It's a lot like someone putting up a website reviewing various types of marijuana they have purchased in the area, and where they purchased it. It may be an illegal activity, but writing about doing it is hardly a crime.
The one good side is that if this gets struck down, why cant we get the DMCA's "trafficing" clause struck down as well? Telling someone how to gamble online illegally vs. Dimitri Skylarov telling people how to crack PDFs. Whats the diff?
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
Well, they just got rid of Knock-and-Announce for all intents and purposes (for a cute current USSC highlight), so the question isn't what they are going to do. The question is how much. I dunno, you wanna take bets on how badly they bone the First Amendment? (For all you creepy-crawlies--that means you, Slashdot laywer lurkers!--I'm well aware that the First Amendment does not apply directly to the states, but is rather incorporated under the Fourteenth Amendment. Just so you don't gang-bang my post, you see.) My personal wager is that they find some way to justify this law using national security! Hah, wager! I crack me up.
All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
That's using the internet to transmit gambling information.
Why not make it illegal to link to a page that links to a page that links to gambling?
I can actually see how the legislators could see a reason to do that. Taxpayer X wants to link to a gambling site, but knows that that's illegal. So he links to a site that has links to gambling sites, and tells you to click through. (Even worse, maybe that link redirects to the gambling site!) So clearly this needs to be stopped as well.
And what about linking to a page that links to a page that links to a page that links to gambling?
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
The next step:
Writing a novel where one of the characters is involved in online gambling is illegal.
Oh, and since bank robbery is illegal, writing stories (online or in print) about bank robbers and the (fictional) details about how they did it will be illegal.
The next step?
Stating that you believe/disbelieve in god will be illegal because it "could" offend someone and lead to illegal acts such as assault, arson, etc.
Stating that "Government (foo) sucks" "President (foo) sucks" will be illegal because it could incite some wacko to assassinate someone.
Think it's a stretch? Well, outlawing discussion of an illegal activity is actually a violation of your first amendment rights so by banning the discussion of gambling, where really does it end? The precedent of limiting speech is very clear, since the discussion has been squelched and ruled illegal because it "could" lead to the DoublePlusUnGood activity, then surely discussing other illegal activities, whether hypothetical, real, or fictional (I make the distinction between hypothetical and fictional here since one is simply an academic discussion and the other is entertainment) would be ruled illegal as well. Where does it end?
This law ought to be turned over by the Federal courts as unconstitutional right away. I hope he fights it to the end.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
Conservatives are very ardent about this subject and have controlling interest in our three branches of government right now. I don't see this being overturned so soon, if ever.
States that currently allow gambling in all it's forms (read: Nevada) will allow online gambling but I believe other states will start to follow Washington's example over the next year.
(end of post)
The current paradigm is throw a wide net, round them all up, and let prosecutors sort them out afterwards. It's the new-and-improved shotgun methodology of law enforcement. And it works! They are almost guaranteed to catch somebody doing something naughty. Once I was arrested during a protest at a university, and charged with 'Disturbing the Peace' along with several other folks. Only later did they realize that in the great state that I live in, the statute forbids them from using DtP for civil disobedience cases. So, after the arrest, they cast about for some other statutory violation to make stick (they failed). I imagine most of the system operates approximately as sloppily.
All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
Something tells me that the Washington State Lottery will still get to promote itself online... apparently they also were even going to sell lottery tickets online but I can't find evidence of them still doing it.
You are reading a copy of my copyrighted post.