Member Avatar for blud

Today the US House of Representatives has approved a new restriction on online gambling. This will in effect make gambling online as severe as owning child pornography. Both will be classified as a Class C Felony. This is a 12 billion dollar industry, with a good chunk (> 30%) of users based out of the USA. The House voted 317-93 for the bill, which will allow officials and ISP’s to setup blocks of internet gambling sites.

Some may look at this law stating that it is a violation of being able to do whatever they want, however the USA has always had restrictions on gambling, and internet gambling was just a way around them. Unfortunately for gamblers, when they are using these online sites, there is a very large risk of their personal data being used, or scammed out of money. Many US credit card companies have already rejected charges from online gambling sites in effort to cut down on the fraud transactions that occur, but this only forces gamblers to go through third party money transfer companies, like Paypal.

Personally, this bill doesn’t affect me right now, but what is going to happen when they find other online services are at risk? Will it eventually affect any of the current tasks that I perform online? This bill has yet to be approved by the Senate, but analysts say the bill wasn’t even expected to pass the House.

  • 5 Contributors
  • 4 Replies
  • 226 Views
  • 1 Week Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by odtaa

Dani AI

Generated

A short, factual update and a few clarifications tied to the points raised by , , , , and .

Congress and enactment: the House did vote 317–93 on the gambling-payment language in mid‑July 2006, and that language was later enacted as Title VIII of the SAFE Port Act and signed into law on October 13, 2006. House roll call (317–93) · SAFE Port Act / Title VIII (UIGEA).

What the law actually does (and what it does not): UIGEA does not recategorize ordinary online gamblers as child‑pornography offenders. Its core prohibition targets businesses — it bars gambling businesses from knowingly accepting specified payment instruments in connection with unlawful Internet wagering. Criminal exposure under the UIGEA for those violations is limited (generally up to five years and fines under 31 U.S.C. §5366), which is very different from federal child‑pornography statutes that carry much higher mandatory minima and maximums under 18 U.S.C. §2251/2252. Text: payment prohibition and definitions (31 U.S.C. subchapter IV) · Criminal penalty (31 U.S.C. §5366) · Child‑pornography penalties (18 U.S.C. §2252).

How it worked in practice: the statute required regulators to prescribe rules to help payment systems identify and block “restricted transactions”; those implementing rules (Regulation GG, 12 C.F.R. part 233) put compliance burdens on banks, card networks and processors rather than directly outlawing player behavior — which explains why issuers and gateways tightened or cut off merchant relationships after 2006. Regulation GG / 12 C.F.R. pt. 233.

Practical takeaway for readers years later: if the concern is everyday, non‑gambling web activity, UIGEA is unlikely to change routine tasks. If running a business that accepts payments tied to wagering, legal risk and compliance obligations matter — check current state rules (some states now license intrastate online gambling; New Jersey legalized iGaming in 2013) and the later Supreme Court decision that opened state sports‑betting (Murphy v. NCAA, 2018). New Jersey iGaming context · Murphy v. NCAA (2018).

Cautions: this is a legal-summary, not legal advice. For business models or payment‑processing questions, consult a lawyer or a compliance specialist familiar with federal and current state rules.

Recommended Answers

All 4 Replies

Member Avatar for 'Stein

Very true...

I'm not a gambler myself, but hey, we have a God-given right of "the pursuit of happiness" (according to the Founding Fathers, at least)

Member Avatar for movielad

I can perhaps see WHY they're doing this - to stop people running up massive gambling debts - but it's a step in the wrong direction and implies that the US is becoming a Nanny state (okay, 50 of them, then).

M.

Member Avatar for sail_knot

If the Gummit cannot tax it, they will not allow it. Is simple 8th grade/? math. But it is done for the good of society. As is the prostition that is legal in (someplace) and the law that says I CAN own a Gun, if and if and if and as long as and if and ($5000 later) Here is your Concealed Permit Mr Chi. So now I have my AK-47, [to defend myself, you know, when you absolutley, posatively HAVE to have 1400 rounds per minute) Freedom is just another word for, [can we still quote Janice Joplin] /? So many lawes to wrirte, so little time. The law that doesnt affect you today is the tornadoe that you didnt build that stoopid shelter for.

Member Avatar for odtaa

It's a crazy world. In Merry Old England we've scrapped the tax on betting, so that the local bookmakers can compete and more importantly the owners of spread betting businesses, which are doing so well that they can afford to give a million or two to political parties, can stay in business.

Which probably explains how the person arrested yesterday operating one of the world's biggest off shore betting businesses was English. Apparently 50% of the income comes from illegal America transactions.

We probably need the electronic equivalent of a bookies runners - say a prgram that says you're buying DVDs and ever so often gives you a massive 100 to 1 cash back.

However we're very tight on casinos and are terrified that a Los Vegas type setup might happen over here, until our Deputy Prime Minister, spends some time at the Texas ranch of one of your bigger operators.

We're also uptight about guns, so that no-one not even our Olympic shooting team can own hand guns. So the gun club weirdos play with carbines, cut down rifles.

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.