Online Gambling Legislation Introduced

slfisher 0 Tallied Votes 567 Views Share

As expected, Representative Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts, has introduced that would roll back a ban on Internet gambling enacted when Republicans led Congress.

The legislation would allow the Treasury Department to license and regulate online gambling companies that serve American customers, according to the New York Times. Under the current law, approved by Congress in September 2006, financial institutions are banned from handling transactions made to and from Internet gambling sites.

Frank, who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, gave two reasons for the legislation. First, the federal government could collect increased tax revenues if Internet gambling was regulated. Second, he said online gambling should be legal as a matter of personal liberty, calling it an activity the government should neither encourage nor prohibit.

Unlike the 2007 bill Frank introduced, this bill forbids betting on sports events, while the earlier one let sports organizations decide themselves whether to prohibit online betting on their games.

Both bills allow states and Indian tribal lands to opt out if they do not want their residents using licensed Web sites, and require companies seeking a license to employ safeguards to help prevent minors from gaining access to gambling sites and combat compulsive gambling. However, Representative Spencer Bachus, Republican of Alabama and the ranking member on the House Financial Services Committee, he was skeptical about age verification technology and other safeguards, citing 2007 testimony from an Internet security expert before his committee asserting that such “security measures are inherently unreliable, can be trivially circumvented and will fail at high rates," the New York Times reported.

Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, D-Nevada, may also have issues with the bill, though it is not clear how much of that is from his Las Vegas constituents.

Dani AI

Generated

A short, practical framing to add context to the thread: is right that the 2009 proposal from Rep. Barney Frank sought to replace the post‑2006 payments ban with a federal licensing framework and built-in consumer safeguards — the bill was H.R.2267 (Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act). (See the official bill summary.) (congress.gov)

The legal background matters. Congress passed the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) in 2006 to curb payment flows for illegal Internet wagering; that statutory regime is the reason many operators either left the U.S. market or relied on opaque payment workarounds. The government’s 2011 enforcement actions (the “Black Friday” indictments and related civil actions) demonstrate how quickly payment‑processing schemes and commingling of player funds became criminal targets. (See the UIGEA text and the April 15, 2011 case announcement.) (congress.gov)

On safeguards and age checks — responding to — simple form questions are trivial to bypass. Recent research shows mandatory age‑verification law and supplier‑responsibilization create tradeoffs: many technical solutions improve accuracy but raise privacy, cost, and false‑positive problems, so regulators demand layered controls (document checks + electronic verification + monitoring + self‑exclusion), not just a single checkbox. The UK regulator’s approach is a useful model for what “robust safeguards” looks like in practice. (mdpi.com)

Practical takeaways for marketers or in‑house counsel briefing executives: assume heavy KYC/AML, geolocation and payment‑custody rules; require independent audits and clear segregation of player funds; bake in self‑exclusion and spend‑limit tools; and plan for a patchwork of state/tribal rules while watching federal developments. Historical enforcement shows that regulatory compliance and transparent payment flows are the least risky path. (congress.gov)

Links mentioned above:

Ancient Dragon 5,243 Achieved Level 70 Team Colleague Featured Poster

“security measures are inherently unreliable, can be trivially circumvented and will fail at high rates,"

I agree completely -- All you have to do to circumvent age questions is to lie about your age when asked. And porn sites have the same problem. Even asking something like SSN and looking it up in government database is useless since a minor could just simply enter a parent's SSN.

As for the proposed bill itself, I'd go along with it. We have enough government intrusion into our lives. People who have gambling problems need professional help, not government intervention.

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.