Slashdot Mirror
Minnesota Latest To Try To Block Gambling Sites
BcNexus writes "A story is developing that the state of Minnesota is contacting ISPs with a request to block about 200 gambling sites online. Minnesota is claiming authority to do so under a 1961 federal law, apparently the Federal Wire Wager Act. There are a couple interesting aspects to watch as this unfolds. Will the ISPs cooperate or will they argue about applicability to casino games, as other have? Will Minnesotans lose their money or access to their money in escrow accounts like the state is warning will happen?"
We gamble every time we buy stock, how is this any different than on a poker table. Somehow, I don't see the "fairness" in this. Personally, I think the odds are better at Black Jack than on Enron.
And what about those sites that lets us play with "chip count" verses real money - are they going to be banned as well?
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
Prohibition doesn't work. Proxies make censorship such as this woefully ineffective at doing what they want it to. Free speech trumps their nanny state. Waste of money during a recession. The flaws are numerous and the sheer quantity of capital likely diverted from productive uses in order to enforce morality is offensive.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
If Minnesota already has some form of state-run gambling, then I understand (but don't codone) their motivations for attempting to ban online gambling. However, if gambling is totally illegal in the state, then I have no idea why they would want to ban the practise. What would they stand to gain?
Does the state even have the authority to do this? Internet access is presumably under the jurisdiction of the federal government and the FCC.
This space left intentionally blank.
According to the act cited in the original post:
"In analyzing the first element, the legislative history[60] of the Wire Act seems to support the position that casual bettors would fall outside of the prosecutorial reach of the statute. During the House of Representatives debate on the bill, Congressman Emanuel Celler, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee stated "[t]his bill only gets after the bookmaker, the gambler who makes it his business to take bets or to lay off bets. . . It does not go after the causal gambler who bets $2 on a race. That type of transaction is not within the purvue of the statute."[61] In Baborian, the federal district court concluded that Congress did not intend to include social bettors within the umbrella of the statute, even those bettors that bet large sums of money and show a certain degree of sophistication.[62] "
IANAL, but I would say from that statute that it is not illegal to gamble or to use gambling cites to gamble. It's illegal to be a bookie (sp?) or facilitate organized gambling as a business. The sites themselves my be illegal, but the users seem to be okay?
No?
My present is the activity I am currently engaged in with the purpose of turning the future into a better past.
5 to 1 odds they have to back down within a week.
They want their hair brained scheme back
Prohibition doesn't work. Proxies make censorship such as this woefully ineffective at doing what they want it to. Free speech trumps their nanny state. Waste of money during a recession. The flaws are numerous and the sheer quantity of capital likely diverted from productive uses in order to enforce morality is offensive.
While I agree with your observation, cut away all the moral and ethical bullshit "justifications", and you'll come to the bottom line as to what is really driving this. It always comes down to someone feeling like they're being robbed. In this case, likely state officials feel as if they're not getting their "cut", or this is somehow cutting into other revenues.
The world has changed.
This law is irrelevant to the current reality.
You can censor the hell out of your citizens (like China) or you can allow them to participate in a free and open internet, not both. Unless every country on this planet agrees to this outdated law, enforcement will be almost impossible.
The only thing they will do is turn their citizens into criminals.
Minnesota your only choice is to either disconnect from the internet or accept that you can not control it.
Of course to truly disconnect you would have to ban all forms of communication except for snail mail and the pony express. No phones, satellite dishes, cable, etc...
"You take the blue pill, the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill, you stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes." - Morpheus
I just submitted this actually...oh well, I'm just glad it made it up here even if I didn't get the credit.
The fundamental problem is that big business likes big government because big government can regulate and legislate in favor of big business. Online gambling is "illegal". Go back and look at the sponsors and co-sponsors of the bills who made it illegal, and then look at their largest donors. Guess who? Brick and mortar casinos, and Indian tribes....imagine that.
And when the utility companies are government-granted monopolies, then they are subservient to big government too. Utilities should be forced to compete in the free and open market without government subsidies or other forms of market insulation from bad decisions.
This is exactly a case which highlights why the government should be small and limited at all levels; when government gets big it inevitability restricts freedom either inadvertently, or on purpose either for its own ends or at the bequest of special interests.
The slippery slope argument here is paramount too because having a State government forcing ISPs and telcos to block specific sites sets a VERY dangerous precedent! In fact I consider this outright censorship because what's illegal about visiting a gambling website, even if one doesn't use the site to gamble.
Not to mention that making online gambling illegal violates one's right to contract which is inherent in a free society. The Constitutionality of this is questionable at best.
Libertas in infinitum
Ok, I was going to let your post slide because I know where you are coming from but...just to be clear...
Stocks and gambling are NOT equivalents. Not even close. When you buy a stock, you own a piece of a company. As in, you own it just like you own a bike or a computer or any other asset in your house. You have (some) legal rights and some "claim" on future earnings. That's what stock, aka common equity, represents.
Additionally, the price of stocks is determined "by the market". In other words, all the buyers and sellers of stock determine the prices as they go along based on the value that they subjectively assign to each stock. That's the market we are speaking of and that's why the prices move. For every sell, there is a buy. And for every buy, there is a sell. The price is arrived at by this process and this process alone. In other words - it is not random.
Wayyyyyy different than gambling. Gambling is random and even worse, the end results (risk/reward profiles) are heavily skewed toward your competitor (the house). Stock price moves are determined by the market. Just a bunch of buyers and sellers agreeing on the price - but it isn't random, like gambling.
Ok, I have to go take the stick out of my ass now....carry on. Thx.
Proxies exist. If you start forcing ISPs to block stuff, all you will do is create a standard market for proxy services. Then you lose the ability for law enforcement to track down crimes as the most popular proxies will be ones outside the US that keep no log information.
Here's the scoop:
- The Federal Wire Act was originally intended to prohibit betting on sports via [telephone] wires.
- The more-recent Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA), which was secretly attached to the 'must-pass' Safe Port Act, made it illegal for banking institutions to allow outgoing financial transactions if the bank believes the funds are intended for online gambling purposes. Each bank must determine what is legal and what is not, with no guidance from the federal government.
- The USDOJ interprets the Wire Act as including the internet, and ALL forms of gambling, despite the fact that the internet did not exist when the act was introduced, and further despite the fact that the act only applies to 'sporting events or contests'.
- The World Trade Organization has repeatedly found the US in violation of its trade agreements with other countries (such as Antigua, who first complained to the WTO, and the United Kingdom, where internet gambling is legalized, regulated and taxed).
- The US continues to ignore the WTO ruling and keeps trying to eradicate internet gambling.
Minnesota is another US state trying to protect its cash cow. Other states with similar laws include Nevada and New Jersey. (Bonus points if you can figure out why!)
The sensible thing to do is to LEGALIZE and REGULATE the multi-billion dollar industry, especially when the tax dollars could prove so helpful during a recession.